JAM   7    1959 
Logical  st^:^ 


(/ 


\.\ 


INTRODUCTION 


TO 

THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

TRANSLATED 
FROM  THE  LATIN  AND   GERMAN  WORKS 

OF 

JOHN  JAHN, 

rtOCTOR  OP  PHILOSOPHY  AND  THEOLOGY  ;     AND   PROFESSOR  OP  THK 

ORIENTAL  LANGUAGES,  BIBLICAL  ARCHAEOLOGY,  ETC.. 

IN    THE    UNH'ERSITY    OP   VIENNA  : 

WITH  ADDITIONAL  REFERENCES  AND  NOTES 


SAMUEL  H.  TURNER,  D.  D. 

yROF.  OF  BIRL.  LEARN.  AND   THE    INTERP.  OF    SCRIPT.  IN    THE    GENERAL 
THEOLOGICAL    SEMINARY    OP    THE    PROT,    EPIS.    CHURCH, 


WILLIAM  R.  WHITTINGHAM,  A.  M. 

AN  ALUMNUS  OF  THE  SEMINARY. 


NEW- YORK  : 
G.  &  C.  CARVILL,  BROADWAY. 

1827. 


Southern  District  of  JVew-York,  ss. 

BE  IT  REMEMBERED,  That  on  the  5th  day  of  December,  A.  D. 
1827,  in  the  52d  year  of  the  Independence  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
Sampel  H.  Turner  and  William  R.  Whittingham  of  the  said  District, 
have  deposited  in  this  office  the  title  of  a  Book,  the  right  whereof  they  claim 
as  Proprietors,  in  the  words  following,  to  wit : 

"  An  Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  translated  from  the  Latin  and  Ger- 
man Works  of  John  Jahn,  Doctor  of  Philosophy  and  Theology  ;  and  Professor 
of  the  Oriental  Languages,  Biblical  Archaeology,  etc..  in  the  University  of. 
Vienna :  with  additional  References  and  Notes  by  Samuel  H.  Turner,  D.  D. 
Prof,  of  Bibl.  Learn,  and  the  Interp.  of  Script,  in  the  General  Theological  Semi- 
nary  of  the  Prot.  Epis.  Church,  and  William  R.  Whittingham,  A.  M.  an  Alum- 
nus of  the  Seminary." 

In  conformity  to  the  Act  of  Congress  of  the  United  States,  entitled  "  An  Act 
for  the  encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing  the  copies  of  Maps,  Charts, 
and  Books,  to  the  authors  and  proprietors  of  such  copies,  during  the  time 
therein  mentioned."  And  also  to  an  Act,  entitled  "  An  Act  supplementary  to 
an  Act,  entitled  an  Act  for  the  encouragement  of  Learning,  by  securing  the 
copies  of  Maps,  Charts,  and  Books,  to  the  authors  and  proprietors  of  such 
copies,  during  the  times  therein  mentioned,  and  extending  the  benefits  thereof  to 
the  arts  of  designing,  engraving,  and  etching  historical  and  other  prints." 

FREDERICK  J.  BE^TTS, 

Clfirk  of  the  Southern  District  of  J^ao-York. 


Printed  by  Vanderpool  &  Cole 


PREFAClii. 


In  presenting  to  the  Public  the  following  Iniioduction,  iii 
translators  feel  confident  that  no  apology  is  necessary.  The 
extensive  knowledge  of  Dr.  Jahn,  and  the  multiplicity  and  ac- 
curacy of  his  researches,  especially  on  Biblical  subjects,  are 
evinced  by  his  numerous  publications,  some  of  which  are  al- 
ready advantageously  known  to  American  readers.  To  the 
inquirer  after  truth,  it  cannot  but  be  a  gratification  to  know  the 
result  of  the  investigations  of  such  a  scholar  respecting  the  va 
I'ious  important  subjects  necessarily  comprised  in  a  work  of 
this  nature.  His  treatment  of  those  subjects  renders  it  evident 
that  he  has  examined  for  himself;  and  the  instances  are  few  in 
which  there  is  reason  to  be  dissatisfied  with  that  examination, 
or  with  the  nature  of  the  judgment  founded  on  it. 

It  may  be  necessary,  however,  to  say  something  of  the  trans- 
lation itself.  Its  basis  is  a  work  entitled, '  Introductio  in  Libros 
sacros  Veteris  Foederis,  in  epitomen  redacta  a  Johanne  Jahn, 
editio  secunda  emendata,  8vo.  Viennos^  1814.'  Of  this  an  entire 
translation  is  given.  But  as  this  volume  was  merely  an  abridg- 
ment, intended  for  the  use  of  seminaries  of  learning  and  the 
author's  own  pupils,  of  his  larger  work, '  Einleitung  in  die  Gott- 
lichen  Biicher  des  Alten  Bundes,  2  Th.  8vo,  fVien,  1803,' the 
translators  deemed  it  expedient  to  add  from  the  latter  as  largely 
as  it  was  possible  to  do,  without  entering  too  minutely  into  un- 
important details,  and  extending  their  book  beyond  the  limits  of 
an  elementary  work.  Such  of  these  additions  as  are  of  no  great 
extent  have  generally  been  incorporated  into  the  text,  with- 
out remark.  Others,  of  more  importance,  for  example  many  of 
the  sections  which  give  an  account  of  the  contents  of  the  differ- 
ent books,  have  been  printed  as  the  text,  but  enclosed  in  brackets. 
But  in  most  instances,  the  additions  from  the  German  have  been 
subjoined  to  the  section  in  a  different  type,  and  enclosed  in 
brackets,  with  references  to  the  passages  of  the  text  to  which 

they  are  supplementary.* A  considerable  number  of  refe 

fences  on  the  subjects  discussed,  and  some  additional  remarks 

*  The  notes  at  the  end  of  sections,  which  are  not  in  brackets,  are  so  printed  m. 
the  author's  Latin  work 


IV  PKEFACE. 

have  been  made  by  the  translators.  These  are  invariably  de 
signated  by  the  letters  "  Tr.''\  and  enclosed  in  brackets.  This 
distinction  has  been  scrupulously  adhered  to,  for  the  purpose  of 
enabling  the  reader  to  know  with  certainty  what  he  may  attri- 
bute to  the  author,  and  for  what  he  may  consider  the  translators 
as  responsible.  It  will  be  perceived  that  the  latter  have  occasion- 
ally expressed  opinions  different  from  those  maintained  by  the 
former.  They  thought  it  incumbent  on  them  to  exhibit  his  views 
without  attempting  to  modify  or  accommodate  them  to  their  own, 
but  assumed  the  privilege  of  stating  their  reasons  for  dissent,  lea- 
ving it  to  the  reader  to  decide  upon  their  value.  Yet  the  trans- 
lators do  not  consider  themselves  responsible  for  every  opinion 
of  Dr.  Jahn  respecting  which  they  have  not  exercised  this  pri- 
vilege. On  many  points  a  latitude  of  opinion  is  allowable,  and 
almost  inevitable,  and  others  require  extensive  and  profound  in- 
vestigation before  a  correct  decision  can  be  formed. 

The  translators  originally  intended  to  divide  their  task,  and 
to  inform  their  readers  of  the  portion  respectively  performed  by 
each.  But  in  its  progress  this  was  found  impracticable,  and  both 
may  now  be  considered  as  responsible  for  every  part,  as  the 
whole  has  been  examined  and  corrected  by  each.* Consi- 
derable pains  have  been  taken  to  make  the  translation  accurate, 
so  far  as  to  exhibit  a  faithful  view  of  the  author's  meaning,  avoid- 
ing at  the  same  time  his  Latin  and  German  constructions.  Oc- 
casionally, in  order  to  render  the  sense  more  plain,  a  slightly 
paraphrastic  rendering  has  been  given,  or  more  perspicuous 
passages  have  been  substituted  from  the  German. 

The  references  of  Jahn  have  all  been  examined  anew,  and  the 
numerous  typographical  errors  in  the  originals  corrected,  while 
the  greatest  care  has  been  taken  to  have  them  correctly  printed 
in  this  edition. 

To  increase  as  much  as  possible  the  utility  of  the  work,  a  re- 
gular table  of  contents  and  complete  indexes  have  been  substi- 
tuted for  the  '  Conspectus  Operis'  of  the  Latin  work. 

Xew-York,  November  30th,  1827. 

^  In  a  single  instance,  a  note  is  distinguished  by  the  initial  of  the  senior 
translator. 


CONTENTS. 


PREIilMIIVARY  REMARKS. 


Names  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  T/sstament.    §  1 . 

Importance  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  2, 

Contents  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  3. 

Meaning  of  an  Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  4. 

Literary  Histoiy  of  Introductions  to  the  Old  Testament.    §  5. 


PART  I. 


GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    SACRED   BOOKS   OF 
THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE  BOOKS    OK   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT    ARE    GENUINE,  INCORRUPT,  ANI> 
WORTHY   OF   CREDIT. 


Importance  of  the  question,  whether  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament 

are  genuine.    §  6. 
Nature  of  the  arguments  used  to  prove  their  genuineness.    §  7. 
Testimony  used  to  prove  their  genuineness.    §  8. 
Internal  evidence  of  their  genuineness.    §  9 
Manner  of  procedure  necessai-y  to  prove  them  spurious.    §  10. 
What  is  meant  by  books  being  corrupted.    §11. 
That  the  Old  Testament  is  corrupted,  repugnant  to  history.    §  12. 


VI  CONTENTS. 

Corruption  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  nature  ot'  things  impos- 

sible.    §  13. 
Pretended  corruptions  of  it.    §  14. 

The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  worthy  of  credit.    §  13. 
The  miracles,  accounts  of  which  are  given  in  the  Old  Testament,  are 

true  miracles.    §  16. 
The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  contain  true  prophecies.    §  17. 
The  Old  Testament  contains  a  divinely  revealed  religion.    §  18. 


CHAPTER  II. 


OF   THE    DIVINE    AUTHORITY    AND   CANON    OP   THE   BOOKS   OF   THE  OLD 

TESTAMENT. 


Their  divine  authority  or  inspiration.    §  19. 

Nature  of  the  argument  for  inspiration.    §  20. 

Testimony  to  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament,  possessed  by  the 

Jews.    §  21. 
Testimony  for  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  22. 
Limits  of  inspiration.     §  23. 

Inspiration  of  the  historical  books.    §  24.  , 

Use  of  Inspiration.    §  25. 

Canon  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  26. 
Manner  in  which  it  is  to  be  ascertained.    §  27. 
The  First  Canon.    §  28. 
The  Second  Canon  [or  Apocrypha].    §  29. 
Canon  of  the  Council  of  Trent.    §  30. 
Apocryphal  Books.    §  31. 


CHAPTER  III. 


HISTORY   OF   THE   VERSIONS   OF   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT. 


Division  of  the  history  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  32. 
Subjects  worthy  of  notice  respecting  the  ancient  versions.    §  33. 


CONTENTS^.  VI I 

Origin  of  the  Alexandrine  Version.    §  34, 

The  Pentateuch  in  that  version  translated  from  a  Jewish  text.    §  36. 

Character  of  the  Alexandrine  version.    §  36. 

Its  authority.    §  37. 

Its  history.    §  38. 

Specimen  of  the  Hexapla.    P.  56. 

Recension  of  the  Alexandrine  Version.    §  39. 

Editions  of  it.    §  39.  Note. 

Version  of  Aqailq..    §  40. 

Version  of  Theodotion.    §  41. 

Version  of  Symmachus.     §  42. 

Fifth,  Sixth,  and  Seventh  Greek  Versions.    §  43. 

Remains  of  the  Greek  versions.    §  44. 

Samaritan  Version.    §  45. 

Targum  of  Onkelos.    §  46. 

Targum  of  Jonathan  on  the  Prophets.    §  47. 

Targum  of  the  Pseudo- Jonathan  on  the  Pentateuch.    §  48 

Jerusalem  Targum  on  the  Pentateuch.    §  49. 

Other  Chaldee  Paraphrases.    §  50. 

Pc*Ai<o  Syriac  Version.    §51. 

Mediate  Syriac  Versions.    §  52. 

Arabic  Versions  from  the  Hebrew  text.    §  53. 

Mediate  Arabic  Versions.    §  54. 

Persian  Version.    §  55. 

Egyptian  Versions.    §  56. 

Ethiopia  Version.    §  57. 

Armenian  Version.    §  58. 

Slavonic  Version.    §  59. 

Ante-Hieronymian  Latin  Versions.    §  60. 

Jerome's  emendation  of  the  Latin  Version.    §61. 

Translation  of  Jerome.    §  62. 

Reception  with  which  it  met.    §  63. 

Its  History.    §  64. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  it.    §  66. 

Correction  of  the  Vulgate.    §  66. 

Version  exhibited  by  the  Latin  Vulgate.    §  67. 


VIII  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  IV. 


RESPECTING   THE   LANGrAGE    OF   THE    BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 
AND   THE    HELPS    TO   UNDERSTAND   IT. 


Language  of  the  Old  Testament.     §  68. 

History  of  the  Hebrew  Language.    §  Q9, 

Loss  of  the  Hebrew  Language.    §  70. 

Its  difficulty.     §71. 

Knowledge  of  it  in  the  Hebrew  and  Christian  schools.    §  72. 

Knowledge  of  it  that  may  be  depended  on.    §  7.3. 

Diversity  in  the  dialects.    §  74. 

They  have  not  changed  their  general  character.    §  75. 

The  numerous  significations   of  words   in  them   creates   no  diffi- 
culty.   §  76. 

Twofold  advantages  in  the  use  of  the  Dialects.    §  77. 

Proper  comparison  of  the  Dialects.    §  78. 

Use  o^  Lexicons.     §  79. 

Value  of  particular  dialects.     §  80. 

Nature  and  use  o{  Etymology.    §  81. 

It  does  not  teach  the  true  meaning,  but  only  illustrates  it.    §  82. 

Necessity  of  Etymology.     §  83. 

Its  limits.     §  84. 

The  ancient  translators  considered  as  witnesses  to  the  usage  ofjan- 
guage.     §  86.  .. ' 

Twofold  advantage  of  the  ancient  versions.    §86. 

Versions  which  ought  to  be  used.    §  87. 

Method  of  using  them.    §  88. 

Requisites  for  a  proper  use  of  them.  §  89. 

Josephus  and  the  Fathers.    §  90. 

Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  on  Inspiration.    §  91. 


CHAPTER  V. 


HISTORY   OF   THE   CONDITION   OF   THE   HEBREW   TEXT. 


Change  of  the  Hebrew  Characters.    §  92. 

Ancient  number  of  the  letters  of  the  Hebrew  Alphabet.    §  93. 


CONTENT:;.  IX 


Age  of  the  Vowel  points .    §  94. 

The  Ehevi  letters  or  matres  lectionis.    §  96. 

Vowel  signs  among  the  ancient  Hebrews.    §  96. 

Age  of  the  accents  and  other  diacritical  marks.    §  97. 

Intervals  between  the  words.    §  98. 

Division  of  the  text  into  verses.     §  99. 

Division  of  the  Pentateuch  into  Pharashioth.     §  100. 

Division  of  the  Prophets  into  Haphtaroth.  §  101. 

Division  of  the  Old  Testament  into  Chapters.    §  102. 

Division  of  the  Books  of  the  Old  Testament.    §  103. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


mSTOKY    OF   THE    HEBREAV   TEXT. 


The  Text  is  by  no  means^ree  from  errors.    §  104. 

History  of  the  text  until  the  Alexandrine  version  was  made.    ^  105, 

History  of  it  from  that  time  to  A.  D.  200.    §  106. 

History  of  it  from  A.  D.  200  to  A.  D.  500.    §  107. 

The  Masora.    §  108. 

The  Eastern  and  Western  Readings.    §  109. 

Recensions  of  Ben  Asher  and  Ben  Naphtali.    §  110. 

History  of  the  text  from  A.  D.  1040  to  A.  D.  1477.    §  1 11 

Principal  editions  of  the  Hebrew  text.    §  1 1 2. 

Origin  of  the  Samaritan  text.    §  113. 

Its  history.    §  114. 

[Origin,  history,  and  difterent  hypotheses.     Note  to  §  114.J 


CHAPTER  VII. 


OF   THE   CKITICISM   OF   THE    TEXT. 


Necessity  of  the  Criticism  of  the  text.    §  1 15. 
A^e  of  Manuscripts.    §  116. 
^oodwe.s5  of  Manuscripts.     §117. 


X  \  CONTENTS. 

Authority  of  the  ancient  editions.     §  118. 

Authority  of  the  ancient  versions.     §  1 1 9- 

Quotations  of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  New.     §  120 

Quotations  in  the  Talmud.    §  121. 

Testimony  of  the  Masora  to  the  state  of  the  text.    §  122. 

Quotations  of  Rabbinical  writers.    §  123. 

Quotations  in  the  Fathers.    §  124. 

Collections  of  Various  Readings.    §  125. 

Of  Internal  Critical  Evidence.    §  126. 

Errors  caused  by  omission.    §  127. 

Errors  caused  by  additions.    §  128. 

Transpositions  of  letters,  words,  or  sentences.    §  129. 

Changes  produced  by  errors  of  the  sight.    §  130. 

Changes  arising  from  failure  of  memory.    §  131. 

Errors  produced  by  incorrectly  hearing.    §  132. 

Alterations  from  parallel  places.    §  1 33. 

Abbreviations  incorrectly  understood.    §  134. 

Marginal  notes  introduced  into  the  text.    §  135. 

Improper  division  of  words.    §  136. 

Erroneous  corrections.    §  137. 

Whether  readings  have  arisen  from  corruption.    §  138. 

Critical  argument  from  the  series  of  discourse.    §  139. 

Arguments  derived  from  Poetic  parallelism.    §  140. 

Argument  from  Parallel  passages.    §  141. 

Probability  as  to  what  the  author  has  written.    §  142, 

General  critical  rules .    §  143. 

Critical  conjecture.    §  144.  i 

Use  of  it.    §  145. 

Doctrinal  conjecture.    §  146. 

Higher  Criticism.    §  147, 


CONTENT.^.  ,  Kl 


PART  II. 


PARTICULAR   INTRODUCTION  TO   EACH    BOOK  OF   THE 
OLD   TESTAMENT. 


Order  of  treatment.    ^  1 . 


SECTION  I. 


OP    THE    HISTORICAL    BOOKS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OF   THE    PENTATEUCH. 


Contents  of  the  Pentateuch.    §  2. 
Internal  evidence  that  Moses  is  its  author.    §  3. 
Moses  styles  himself  the  author.     §  4. 
Its  contents  have  been  publicly  known  in  all  ages.    §  5. 
They  were  known  as  the  Law  of  Jehovah.    §  6. 
As  the  Law  of  Moses.    §  7. 
As  the  Book  of  Moses.    §  8. 
Moses  the  author  of  Genesis.    §  9. 
Interpolations  in  the  Pentateuch.     §  10. 
It  is  not  a  compilation  of  recent  date.    §11. 
Arguments  against  its  genuineness,  with  answers.     §  12. 
The  Pentateuch  has  not  been  re-written.     §  13. 
Whether  Moses  himself  wrote  the  Pentateuch.    §  14. 
Genesis  is  compiled  from  ancient  documents.    §  15. 
Documents  collected  in  Genesis.    §  16. 
Age  of  those  documents.    §  17. 
Their  historical  credit.    §  18. 

Arguments  to  prove  the  existence  of  Mythi  in  the  Pentateuch,  with 
answers.    §  19. 


XU  CONTENTS. 

Gen.  i.  1 — ii.  3.  one  of  the  most  ancient  documents.    §  20. 
Manner  in  which  those  ancient  records  have  been  compiled.    §  21. 
The  publication  of  the  Pentateuch.    §  22. 

[Division  and  names  of  the  books.    §  22.    Note.] 


CHAPTER  II 


OF   THE   BOOK   OF   JOSHUA. 


Its  Contents.    §  23. 

Design  of  the  Author.    §  24. 

Whether  Joshua  was  its  author.     §  25. 

It  is  more  recent  than  his  time.    §  26. 

Age  of  the  Book  of  Joshua.    §  27. 

It  has  been  compiled  from  ancient  documents.    §  28. 

It  is  worthy  of  credit.     §  29, 

Difficulties  which  occur  in  it.    §  30. 

Character  of  its  Hebrew  text.    §31. 


CHAPTER  III. 


OF   THE    BOOKS   OP   JUDGES   AND   ROTH. 


Contents  of  the  Book  of  Judges.    §  32. 

Design  of  the  Book.    §  33. 

Its  Age.    §  34. 

It  is  talcen  from  ancient  documents.    §  36. 

Authority  of  the  Book  of  Judges.    §  36. 

Difficidties  in  it.    §  37. 

First  Appendix  to  the  book  ;  c.  xvii.  xviii.    §  38. 

Second  Appendix;  c.  xix — xxi,    §  39. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ruth.    §  40. 

Its  Age.    §  41. 

It  is  ivorthy  of  o'edence.    §  42. 

The  age  of  the  Judges  not  heroic.    §  43. 


CONTENTS.  Xm 

CHAPTER  IV. 


OP   THE    BOOKS    OF   SAMUEL,    KINGS     AND   CHRONICLES. 


Contents  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings.    §  44. 
They  are  not  coeval  with  the  transactions  which  they  record.   §  46. 
They  were  written  by  the  same  author.    §  46. 
Their  age.    §  47. 

Contents  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles.    §  48. 
Design  of  them.     §  49. 
Their  age.    §  50. 

Sources  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  Kings,  and  Chronicles.    §  61. 
Their  historical  credit.    §  62. 
Di^culties  in  them.     §  53. 
Character  of  their  text.    §  64. 

Collation  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  with  the  Books  of  Chro- 
nicles ;  with  a  table  of  the  parallel  parts.    §  56. 


CHAPTER  V. 


OF   THE   BOOKS   OF    EZRA   AND    NEHEMIAH. 


Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ezra     §  56. 

Artachshasta  in  Ezra  vii.  1.  is  Xerxes.    §  57. 

Ezra  is  the  author  of  the  book.    §  58. 

Dijiculties  in  it.     §  59. 

Character  of  its  text.     §  60. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Nehemi.ah.    §  61. 

The  Artaxerxes  of  Nehemiah  is  Artaxerxes  Longimanus.    §  62. 

The  yeur  of  Nehemiali's  second  visit  to  .Terusalem.    §  63, 

Nehemiah  was  the  author  of  the  book  bearing  his  name.    §  64. 


XIV  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  VI 


OF   THE   BOOK    OP   ESTHER. 


Its  contents.    §  66. 

Who  is  king  Ahasuerus  ?    §  66. 

Difficulties  in  the  book.    §  67. 

Its  author  and  age.    §  68. 

Its  text.    §  69. 

On  its  canonical  authority.    §  70. 


SECTION  II. 


OF    THE    PROPHETS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OP    PKOPHECIES. 


Of  prophecies  in  general.    §71. 
Origin  of  faith  in  prophecies.     §  72. 

Prophecies  of  the  Bible  neither  founded  on  superstition  nor  on  im- 
posture.    §  73. 

I.  Their  External  Circumstances.    §  73. 

II.  Their  Contents.     §  74. 

i.  They  are  many,  and  consentaneous.    §  76. 

ii.  Their  design     §  76. 

iii.  They  relate  to  remote  events.    §  77. 

iv.  They  are  not  ambiguous.    §  78. 
The  Prophecies  of  Scripture  not  general.    §  79. 
They  are  clear.    §  80. 
Of  the  prophetic  perspective  vision.    8 1 . 
Some  prophecies  have  a  double  sense.    §  82. 
The  subject  of  the  Prophecies.    §  83. 
The  statutes  of  Moses  concerning  Prophets.    §  84. 


CONTENTS.  XV 


Evidences  ot"  a  divine  mission.    §  85. 
Character  of  the  divine  revelations.    §  86. 
Prophetic  style.    §  87. 
Fulfilment  of  the  prophecies.    §  88. 


CHAPTER  II. 


OF   THE    PROPHETS    UNDER   UZZIAH    JOTHAM,    AHAZ,    AND    HEZEKIAH. 


Personal  history  of  Amos.    §  89. 

Age  in  which  he  Hved.     §  90. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Amos.    §  91. 

Its  style.    §  92. 

Age  in  which  Hosea  lived.    §  93. 

Contend*  of  the  Book  of  Hosea.    §94. 

Its  style.    §  95. 

Personal  history  oi  Micah     §  96. 

Contents  of  the  Book  o^  Micah.    §  97. 

Its  style.     §  98. 

Publication  oi  ihe  book.     §  99. 

Personal  history  of  Isaiah,  and  age  in  which  he  hved.    §  100, 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah.    §  101. 

%Z«  of  Isaiah.     §  102. 

Are  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  entire  ?    §  103. 

All  the  praphecies  in  the  book  are  by  Isaiah.    §  104. 

Prophecies  which  are  supposed  not  to  be  his.    §  105. 

The  prophecy  against  Tyre,  c.  xxiii.    §  106. 

Prophecies  against  Babylon.    §  107. 

They  are  the  productions  of  Isaiah.    §  108. 

Whether  Isaiah  is  the  author  of  c.  xxxvi — xxxix.    §  109. 

Publication  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah.    6  110. 


XVI  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER  III. 


OP   THE    PROPHETS    WHOSE    AGE    HAS    NOT   BEEN    RECORDED. 


Of  the  Prophets  of  an  uncertain  age  generally.    §  111, 

Contents  of  the  Book  oi  Joel.    §  112. 

Style  of  Joel.     §  113. 

A^e  in  which  he  hved.    §  1 14. 

Contents  oi the  ^ook  o{ Nahum.    §115. 

Style  of  Nahum.    §  116. 

Age  in  which  he  lived.    §  1 17, 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Habakkuk.     §  118, 

lis  style.    §  119. 

Age  in  which  the  prophet  lived,    §  120. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Obadiah.    §  121. 

%Ze  of  Obadiah.    §  122. 

Age  in  which  he  lived.    §  123. 

Time  in  which  Jonah  hved.    §  124. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Jonah.    §  1 26. 

Difficulties  in  the  narrative.    §  126. 

Whether  it  is  a  parable.    §  127. 

Whether  it  is  a  true  history.    §  128. 

Age  of  the  Book  of  Jonah.    §  1 29. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


OF    THE    PROPHETS   FROM  THE   AGE   OF    JOSIAH   TO   THE   END   OF  THE 

CAPTIVITY. 


Age  of  Zephaniah.    §  1 30. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Zephaniah.    §  131, 

Its  style.    §  132. 

Of  Jeremiah  and  his  age.    §  133, 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.    §  134. 

.S72/ie  of  Jeremiah.    §136. 

Order  of  the  Prophecies.    §  136. 


CONTENTS.  XVll 

Alexandrine  Version  of  the  Book  of  Jeremiah.    §  137. 
[Table  of  the  different  arrangements  of  the  LXX.  and  the  Hebrew. 
§  137.     Note.] 
Author  of  the  Book  of  Lamentations.    §  138. 
Subject  of  it.    §  139. 
Its  Style.     §  140. 

Age  in  which  Ezekiel  hved.    §  141, 
Corate.v^*  of  the  Book  of  Ezekiel.    §  14L'. 
SfyZe  of  Ezekiel.    §  143. 
Order  of  his  prophecies.    §  144. 
On  the  last  nine  chapters  of  Ezekiel.    §  145. 

Whether  Ezekiel  wrote  the  prophecies  against  the  Heathen.    §  146. 
Personal  history  of  Daniel.    §  147. 
Contents  of  the  Book  of  Daniel.    §  148. 
Its  style.    §  149. 

Whether  Daniel  is  the  author  of  it.    §  15U. 
Objections  to  its  genuineness.    §  151 . 
Arguments  against  the^r*^  part  of  it.    §  152. 
Arguments  against  the  second  part  of  it.     §  153, 
OnjO'm  and  co??d?Vion  of  the  book.    §  154. 


CHAPTER  V 


OF    THE    PROPHETS   WHO    LIVED   AFTER    THE   CAPTIVITV. 


Time  of  Haggai.  §  3  55. 

Con/e?j^5  of  the  Book  of  Haggai.    $  150. 

Its  style.    §  157. 

Time  in  which  Zechariah  lived.     §  158. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah.    ^  159. 

Its  style.    §  160. 

Whether  the  second  part  of  it  is  written  by  Zechariah.    §  J61, 

Publication  of  the  book.    §  162. 

Time  of  Malachi.    §  163. 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Malachi.    §  164. 

Its  style.     §   166. 


XVlll  CONTENTS. 

SECTION  III. 


OF   THE    OTHER    POETICAL    BOOKS   OF   THE    OLD 
TESTAMENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OF   THE    PSALMS. 


Date  of  the  Book  of  Psalms.    §  166. 

Its  contents.    §  167. 

Titles  of  the  Psalms.    §  168. 

Age  of  the  titles.    §  169. 

Psalm  by  Moses.    §  170. 

Psalms  of  ZJamd.    §  171. 

Psalms  inscribed  to  the  Korahites  and  to  Jeduthun.    §  172 

Psalms  of  Asaph.    §  1 73. 

Psalms  oi  Heman  and  Ethan.    §  174. 

Psalms  ascribed  to  Solomon.    §  175. 

Anonymous  Psalms.    §  176. 

Collection  and  division  of  the  Book  of  Psalms.    §  177. 

Vs^z^xns  of  degrees.    §  178. 

Psalms  composedyor  choirs.    §  179. 


CHAPTER  II. 


or   THE   PROVERBS    OF   SOLOMON. 


Title  and  nature  of  the  book.    §  1 80. 

Its  contents.    §  181. 

SoZo»i(Wi  its  author.    §182. 

Style  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs.    §  183. 

Its  use.    6  1 84. 


(CONTENTS.  XIX 

CHAPTER  III. 


OP  THE  HOOK  OF  JOB. 


Contents  of  the  book.    §  185. 

Arrangement  and  style.    §  186. 

Opinions  respecting  its  contents.    §  187. 

Supposition  that  it  is  not  a  history  but  a  parable.    §188. 

That  it  is  a  true  history.    §  189. 

That  it  is  founded  on  real  history.     §  190. 

Design  of  the  author.     §191. 

Of  Job'' s  place  o(  residence.    §192. 

Of  the  time  in  which  he  lived.    §  193. 

Of  the  rank  of  Job.    §  194. 

The  Book  of  Job  the  work  of  one  author.    §  195. 

The  Hebrew  text  of  it  is  not  a  version.    §  196. 

The  author  was  a  Hebrew.    §  197. 

It  does  not  belong  to  the  age  of  the  Babylonish  captivity.    §  198. 

It  does  not  belong  to  the  age  of  Solomon.    §  199. 

It  was  written  prior  to  the  Exode.    §  200. 

Of  the  author  of  the  Book  of  Job.    §  201. 

Objections    to    the    opinion    that    Moses    was    the    author,    willi 

answers.    §  202. 
The  design  of  Moses  in  writing  the  book.    §  203. 


CHAPTER  IV 


OF  THE  SONG  OF  SONGS,  OR  CANTICLES, 


Contents  of  the  book.    §  204. 

Whether  the  different  parts  are  connected,    so   as   to  form  one 

poem.    §  205. 
The  subject  of  the  book.    §  206. 
It  is  a  canonical  book.    §  207. 
Author  and  age  of  the  book.    §  208, 


\X  CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  V 


OF    ECCLESIASTES. 


On  the  najne  of  the  book.    §  209. 
Contend*  of  Ecclesiastes,    §210. 
Arrangement  of  its  contents.    §211. 
Scope  of  the  work.    §  212. 
Language  and  style  of  the  book.     §  213, 
Its  author.    §  214. 
[isase.    §215. 


SECTION  IV. 


on    the    deuterocanonical   writings  j 
[the  apocrypha]. 


Difficulties  in  those  writings.    §  216. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OF    THE    BOOK    OF    BARUCH. 


Baruch,  and  the  time  in  which  he  lived.    §  217, 

Contents  of  the  Book  of  Baruch,    §  218. 

Difficulties  in  it.    §  219. 

Language  of  the  book.    §  220. 

Of  the  Epistle  which  is  contained  in  c.  vi.    §  221. 

Versions  of  the  Book  of  Baruch.    §  222. 


CONTENTS.  XXI 


CHAPTER  U. 


OF  THE  DEUTEROCANONICAL  PARTS  OF  THE  BOOK  OF  DANIEL. 


The  Song  of  the  Three  Children.    §  223. 
Its  language.    §  224. 
History  of  Susannah.     §  225. 
Diificulties  in  that  history      §  2  26. 
Femon  of  the  history  of  ^usannah.     §  227. 
History  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon.    §  228. 
Difficulties  in  the  narrative.     §  229. 
Original  language  of  the  history      §  230. 
Versions  of  the  history.    §  231. 


CHAPTER  III. 


OF    THE    DEUTEROCANONICAL    ADDITIONS    TO    THE    BOOK    OF    ESTHER. 


Contents  of  those  additions.     §  232. 
Their  original  language.  §  233. 
Versions  of  these  fragments.     §  234. 
Whether  they  are  deuterocanonical.    §  235. 


CHAPTER  IV 


OF    THE    BOOK    OF    TOBIT. 


Contents  of  the  book.    §  236. 
Difficulties  in  it.    §  237. 
Solution  of  the  difficulties.    §  238. 
Original  language  of  the  book.    §  239. 
Its  age.    §  240. 


XXll  CONTENTS. 

Author  of  the  Book  of  Tobit.    §  24 1 . 
Versions  of  the  book.    §  242. 


CHAPTER  V. 


OF    THE    BOOK    OF    JUDITH. 


Contents  of  the  book.    §  243. 
Difficulties  in  it.    §  244. 
Solution  of  the  difficulties.     §  245. 
Age  of  the  book.    §  246. 
Its  language.    §  247. 
Femons  of  the  book.    §248. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


OF  THE    BOOK    OF    ECCLESIASTICUS,   OR    THE    WISDOM    OF    THE    SOW  OF 

SIRACH. 


Time  in  which  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  lived.    §  249. 
Contents  of  the  book  of  Ecclesiasticus.     §  260. 
Fer*io»»  of  the  work.    §261. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


OF    THE    BOOK    OF    WISDOM. 


Contents  of  the  book.    §  252. 
Its  original  language.    §  263. 
Author  and  age  of  the  book.    §  254. 
Versions  of  the  work.    §  256, 


CONTENTS.  XXIU 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


OF    THE    FIRST    TWO    BOOKS    OF    MACCABEES. 


Of  the  name  of  the  books.    §  256. 

Contents  of  the  First  book  of  Maccabees.    §  257 . 

Age  of  the  book.    §  258. 

Its  original  language     §  269. 

Versions  of  it.    §  260. 

Contents  of  the  Second  book  of  Maccabees.    §  261. 

Difficulties  in  it.    §  262. 

Its  author  and  age.    §  263. 

Language  and  versions  of  the  book.    §  264. 


The  following  abbreviations  have  been  used 


throughout  the  iDork. 

B.  for  Book,  or  in  German  titles,  Bande. 
Th.  for  Theil. 

V      i 

,r' ,   >  for  Volume. 
Vol.  ) 

Tom.  for  Tomus. 

St.  for  Stuck. 

P.  for  Part,  or  Pars. 

c.  for  chapter. 

V.  for  verse. 

S.  for  Seite. 

p.  for  page. 

pp.  for  pages. 

s.  for  sequens,  the  next. 

ss.  for  sequentes,  the  following. 

f.  for  folgend,  the  next. 

ff.  for  folgende,  the  following. 

comp.  i        c  compare, 

r     >  for  <         c 
cont.    ^        I  center,  compare. 

anm.  for  anmerkung,  note. 

Old  Testament, 

Alte  Testament, 

Vetus  Testamentum. 

A.  B  for  Alte  Bund. 

\        (  New  Testament, 

N.  T.  >  for  <  Novum  Testamentum, 

J        \  Neue  Testament. 

Einleit 

Einl. 

Introd.  for  Introduction. 

e.  g.  for  exempli  gratia,  jTor  example. 

V.  for  vide.    See. 

q.  v.  quod  vide,  which  see. 

a.  s.  f.  for  and  so  forth,  and  so  forth. 


for  Einleitung. 


INTRODUCTIOIM 


SLACKED  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 


PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 


§  1.     Names  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. \a\ 

The  books  which  the  Hebrews,  Israelites,  or  Jews-,  have  long  ve- 
nerated as  divine,  are  usually  called  The  Old  Testament,  in  order 
to  distinguish  them  from  the  sacred  books  of  the  Christian  religion, 
which  are  called  The  New  Testament.  This  appellation  is  taken 
from  II  Cor.  iii.  6.  14.  comp.  Mat.  xxvi.  28.  Gal.  iii.  17.  Heb,  viii. 
8.  ix.  15 — 20,  where  the  ancient  Latin  translators  have  rendered 
Siadrixt;  (which  signifies  both  a  covenant  and  a  testament  but  in 
the  Bible  always  answers  to  the    Hebrew   nns,    a  covenant)  Tes- 

TAMENTUM,  «  testament,  because,  as  Jerome  remarks,  Comm.  in 
Malach.  c.  ii.  2.,  they  by  a  Graecism  attributed  to  this  word  the  sense 
of  FOEDUs ,  a  covenant,  [b]  The  expression  ^aXaia  Sia6r]xrj  old  covenant, 
II  Cor.  iii.  14.,  signifies  the  ancient  divine  instructions,  promises,  and 
threats,  and  the  whole  scheme  of  the  Mosaic  rehgion  ;  but  as  all 
these,  with  an  account  of  their  eft'ects  in  the  course  of  time,  and  of 
the  furtherances  and  obstructions  with  which  they  met.  are  contained 
in  the  books  under  consideration  the  name  was  by  a  metonymy  trans- 
ferred to  the  books,  so  that,  vetus  foedus,  old  covenant  stands  for 
the  books  of  the  old  covenant  or  testament,  just  as,  with  a  more 
limited   application,   n'l^n   "13D    occurs   Ex.   xxiv.    7.,    and  S'jSXiov 

oia&rjxvjg  I  Mace.  i.  hi. The  appellation   xipD  the  reading  booh 

1 


2  PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 

by  way  of  eminence,  similar  to  the  Arabic  .  |  Z^  koban,  is  ap- 
plied to  the  books  of  Moses,  Neh.  viii.  8.  :  by  the  Rabbins  its  appli- 
cation is  extended  to  the  whole  collection  of  the  Old  Testament. — 
So  also  the  name   mi'i'^n,  mm,  o  vofji.os   the  law,  (by  which  word 

the  Orientals  also  express  religion  itself.)  and  that  of  rTiir^n  *ii3D  the 

book  of  the  law  or  of  religion,  in  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  de- 
signate the  books  of  Moses  alone  ;  but  by  the  more  recent  Jews  they 
are  transferred  to  aU  the  sacred  books,  as  appears  not  only  from 
John  X.  34.  xii.  34.  xv.  25. 1  Cor.  xiv.  21.,  but  also  from  the  Talmud, 
Sanhedrim,  p.  91.  col.  2.  compare  Wetstenii  Nov.  Test.  P.  I.  p.  913. 
— The  names  2rtD,  3T1J3D-,  ^  ypatpjy  the  scripture,  di  ygacpai  the  scriptures, 

ypo^iat  ayLM  the  holy  scriptures,  and  U^a  y^a\i^ouTa  tlie  sacred  letters,  are 
often  used  to  express  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  by  Flavius  Jo- 
sephus,  Philo  the  Jew,  and  the  Rabbins,  and  also  by  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament ;  (II  Peter  i.  20.  Matt.  xxii.  29.  Rom.  i.  2.  II  Tim. 
iii.  15.  &c.)  We,  however,  apply  them  collectively  to  the  books  of 
both  the  Old  and  New  Testaments.  Jerome  substituted  for  these 
expressions  that  of  Sancta  Bibliotheca,  the  Sacred  Library,  w\dch, 
although  it  is  well  adapted  to  express  its  object,  has  yet  not  been  so 
readily  adopted  as  the  name  (oi§Xia,  the  small  books,  by  way  of  eminence; 

which  Chrysostom  was  accustomed  to  use. Concerning  the  other 

names  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament ; the  Law  and  the  Pro- 
phets ;  the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  other  books ;  the  Law,  the  Pro- 
phets, and  the  Psalms  (which  are  the  most  eminent  among  the  other 

books ;) all  which  arise  from  the  division  of  the  books :  see  below 

§  103,  and  Ecclus.  Prologue,  I.  1,  2.  Matt.  v.  17.  vu.  12.  xi.  13. 
xxii.  40.  Luke  xvi.  16. [c] 

[a)  Comp.  Eichhorns  Einleitung  in  das  A.  T.  viert.  Aus.  Ooett.  1823, 
Th.  I.  5  6.     Tr.] 

[b)  On  this  use  of  tiie  word  Siadrjxfj  see  Pritii  Introd.  in  N.  T.  c.  ii. 
p.  3.  s.  ed.  Hoffm.,  and  Rosenmueller  de  vocabuli  SmOtixt]  in  libris  N. 
T.  vario  usu,  in  Kuinoel,  Ruperti,  and  Velthdesek  Commentat. 
rheol.  Vol.  II.    Tr.] 

[c)  On  the  subject  of  this  section  see  Lardner,  History  of  the  Apostles 
'     c.  i.  Vol.  I.  pp.  1 — 18.  ;  MiCHAELis  Diss,  qua  nomina,  numerus,  divisio 

c'l  ordo  librorum  V.  T.  sistuntur,  Halae.  1743. :  Suiceri  Thesaiir.  ihro- 

•  ibusi  i^,\.:'.  ynaiptj,  ct  dtaBgKr;,     Tr.i 


PRELIMINARY    REMARKS.  3 

§2.     Importance  (^  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

I.  Jesus  has  not  only  approved  of  these  books  as  of  the  greatest 
utility  and  credibility-  and  made  them  the  foundation  of  his  doctrine, 
but  also  very  frequently  cites  them  in  express  terms,  as  testimony  of 
the  highest  authority,  as  in  Mat.  vii.  12,  xi.  13 — 15.  xxii.  37 — 43. 
Lu.  xvi.  16.  s.,  29.  s.  Jo.  v.  39.  s.,  46.  x.  35.,  and  in  other  places, 
but  especially  Mat.  v.  17,  18,  where  he  says  he  did  not  come  to  abo- 
lish the  law  and  the  prophets  i.  e.  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
but  to  complete  or  make  them   perfect :     comp.    IDJ    and  aim  in 

BtrxTORFii  Lex.  Chald.  Talm.  Rab.  col.  450.  452. — Wherever  he 
speaks  of  his  own  exalted  dignity,  he  establishes  it  upon  these  books, 
as  Mat.  xi.  13.  compare  Lu.  i.  31 — 33.  xxiv.  25 — 27,  44 — 47. 
John  v.  39.,  but  especially  Mat.  xxvi.  63.  s.  where,  being  adjured 
by  the  judge,  he  affirms  upon  oath  that  he  is  the  person  who  in  these 
sacred  writings  was  promised  to  come  as  the  Messiah.  This  decla- 
ration he  confirmed  by  shedding  his  blood  upon  the  cross,  so  that  it 
can  by  no  means  be  supposed  to  have  been  a  mere  accommodation  to 
the  opinions  of  the  Jews  ;  since  no  accommodation  can  be  conceived 
less  suited  to  its  purpose  than  that  which  not  only  alienated  from  the 
speaker  the  people  to  whom  it  is  supposed  to  have  been  adapted,  but 
also  accelerated  his  death,  [a] 

IL  The  Apostles  and  Evangelists  constantly  cite  these  books  in. 
proof  of  their  doctrine  ;  e.g.  Acts  iii.  18 — Sl.xxviii.  25.  I  Pet.  i.  11. 
II  Pet.  i.  19.  ii.  21.  I  Cor.  x.  6.  Rom.  xv.  4.  They  also  delivered 
them  to  the  churches  which  they  founded,  as  a  sacred  treasure  of  re- 
ligious instruction,  and  ordered  them  to  be  read  in  public  worship. 
Paul,  by  no  means  a  partizan  of  the  Mosaic  rites  says  II  Tim.  iii.  1 5.s., 
that  these  books  are  able  to  make  Christians  wise  unto  salvation, 
and  thoroughly  to  instruct  the  ministers  of  the  church  in  her  doc- 
trine. No  one  would  write  in  this  manner,  were  his  object  merely 
to  accommodate  himself  to  the  erroneous  opinions  or  manner  of 
speaking  of  the  people. [6] 

III.  The  primitive  church,  under  the  teaching  of  the  apostles  and 
their  disciples,  or  but  little  removed  from  them,  constantly  maintain- 
ed the  same  opinion,  and  separated  the  Gnostics,  the  Marcionites, 
and  the  Manichees  from  her  communion,  because  they  contemptuously 


J  PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 

rejected  these  sacred  books,  in  defence  of  which  several  of  the  earh- 
flst  fathers  wrote  against  their  opponents. 

IV.  These  books  recommend  themselves,  not  only  by  their  great 
antiquity  going  back  to  sixteen  centuries  before  the  Christian  sera  [c] 
but  also  by  their  contents  ;  of  which  it  will  be  necessary  to  treat 
more  at  length. 

[a)  See  Gessner's  Jesus  der  verheissene  Messias,Zwnc/i,  1798;  and 
Storr,  iiber  den  Geist  des  Christenthums,  in  Flatt's  Magazin  fiir  Chr. 
Dogm.  und  Mor.  I.  St.  S.  111—169] 

[6)  See  Kledker  Tractat.  de  nexu  qualis  constet  inter  utrumque  di- 
vinae  constitutionis  foedus  prophetico.  Helmstadi,  1792.] 

[e)  The  most  ancient  of  them  are  between  six  and  seven  hundred  years 
older  than  Homer,  the  oldest  Greek  poet,  who  lived  in  the  9th  centurj' 
before  Christ;  and  about  eleven  hundred  years  older  than  Herodotus,  the 
earliest  Grecian  historian,  who  wrote  in  the  5th  century  before  Christ, 
and  near  the  time  when  Malachi  and  Nehemiah  composed  the  last  of 
the  Hebrew  scriptures.  This  great  antiquity  must  render  these  writings 
in  the  highest  degree  attractive  and  full  of  instruction,  even  though  the 
Yajur  Veda  of  the  Hindoos  should  be  yet  older,  as  Sir  William  Jones,  in 
his  preface  to  the  Institutions  of  Menu,  asserts,  but  has  not  proved.  His 
arguments  rest  upon  uncertain  genealogies,  upon  conjectures,  and  upon 
rash  conclusions,  and  after  all  only  tend  to  show  that  the  Veda  was  com- 
posed in  the  year  1580,  B.  C,  which,  according  to  the  most  accurate  com- 
putation, was  the  24th  year  of  the  journeying  of  the  Hebrews  in  Arabia 
Petrsea,  consequently,  exactly  the  age  in  which  Moses  wrote  his  books.] 

§  3.     Contents  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  principal  points  in  the.  contents,  in  respect  of  which  these 
books  excel  all  others,  are  the  following. — 1)  The  maintenance  of 
the  doctrine  concerning  the  true  God  in  those  ancient  times  when 
all  the  world  worshipped  creatures  and  vain  devices,  [a] — 2)  The  doc- 
trine of  the  dignity  of  man,  and  of  his  relation  to  God  as  the  creator 
and  governor  of  the  world,  and  the  benefactor  and  judge  of  men  : 
also  a  system  of  morality,  such  as  may  in  vain  be  sought  for  among 
other  ancient  nations. — 3)  Miracles  and  prophecies  entirely  unex- 
ampled. Many,  it  is  true,  have  written  and  do  still  write  against 
these  miracles  and  prophecies  ;  yet  none  can  deny  that  they  far  ex- 
eel  all  those  of  which  the  heathens  boast.  They  are  not  only  free 
from  all  superstition,  aad  of  a  nature  and  magnitude  worthy  of  the 


PRELIMINARY    REMARKS.  b 

Deitv,  but  moreover  they  all  tend  to  one  object,  the  giving  evidence 
that  certain  men  were  sent  by  the  omnipotent  and  omniscient  God, 
the  ruler  of  the  world,  to  the  end  that  by  their  instructions  the 
knowledge  of  God  and  true  religion  might  be  preserved  and  handed 
down  to  a  remote  posterity,  by  whom  it  should  be  propagated  to 
other  nations  ;  and,  in  reality-  was  at  length  so  propagated. — 4)  A 
history,  commencing  with  the  creation  and  the  existence  of  the  first 
man,  and  carried  down  to  a  period  but  httle  anterior  to  Christ ;  con- 
taining many  points  of  doctrine   and  many  salutary  precepts,  and 
showing,  among  other  things  the  perils  which  the  knowledge  of  God 
underwent  among  the  Israelites  themselves   and  the  measures  wliich 
were  taken  by  the  Deity  for  its  preservation  among  men.[c] — 6)  Last- 
ly, a  design  of  the  most  extraordinary  kind  ;  which  after  having  been 
proposed  in  the  most  ancient  writings    and  declared  with  gradually 
increasing  clearness  in  those  that  followed    was  .it  last,  in  the  New 
Covenant,  carried  into  effect  in  a  most  wonderful  manner.     The  na- 
ture of  this  design  is  such,  that  men  left  to  themselves  could  neither 
have  at  first  invented  such  an  one,  nor  have  carried  on  in  such  a 
manner  its  progressive  dcvelopement,  nor  at  last  have  thus  produced 
its  full  accomplishment.     For  not  only  were  all  its  greater  events 
predicted,  and  every  prediction  exactly  fulfilled  ;  but  even  in  the  time 
of  Abraham,  Isaac,   and  Jacob,   (Gen.  xii.   1 — 4.    xv.   xvii.  4 — 14. 
xviii.  16 — 22.  xxii.  18.  xxvi.  1 — 4.  xxviii.  12 — 18.)  twenty-two  cen- 
turies before  Christ,  when  polytheism  and  idolatry  were  predomina- 
ting throughout  the  world,   a  prospect  was  afforded  of  those  latter 
times,   in  which,   by  means  of  the  posterity  of  those  patriarchs,  a 
saving  knowledge  of  God  should  be  propagated  among  all  nations. 
At  length,   sixteen  centuries  before  Christ,   when  the  posterity  of 
Jacob  themselves  had  become  contaminated  with  idolatrous  supersti- 
tion in  Egypt,  a  theocracy,  or  government  by  which  God  became  the 
civil  ruler  of  the  people,  was  established  by  the  agency  of  Moses  in 
that  nation  which  had  been  chosen  for  the  preservation  and  propaga- 
tion of  the  true  religion.     This  was  afterwards  preserved  throughout 
all  the  numerous  vicissitudes  which  the  nation  underwent   notwith- 
standing the  frequent  and  strong  endeavours  of  the  people,  and,  in 
course  of  time,  of  the  kings  with  all  their  regal  power,  to  abolish 
and  destroy  it.     When  at  last  the  nation,  having  become  idolatrou?- 


^  PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 

was  carried  away  into  heathen  lands,  partly  by  the  Assyrians  and 
partly  by  the  Chaldeans  and  nothing  else  could  be  expected  than 
that,  surrounded  by  idolaters  it  should  become  wholly  idolatrous  ;  on 
the  contrary  warned  by  their  adversity  the  Hebrews  became  sincere 
worshippers  of  God  and  were  brought  back  as  Moses  and  after  him 
many  of  the  prophets  had  predicted  fiom  the  foreign  lands  in  which 
they  had  been  dispersed  to  Palestine  more  than  ever  confirmed  in 
their  own  reUgion.  From  that  time  they  could  no  more  be  seduced 
from  their  religion  by  contempt  and  ignominy,  nor  even  by  bitter 
persecutions  and  torturing  deaths,  until  the  time  when  the  early  pro- 
mises, which  had  been  continually  confirmed,  enlarged  and  variously 
represented  by  the  prophets,  were  fulfilled,  and  the  knowledge  of 
God  was  spread  among  the  various  nations  of  the  earth. [d] 

[«)  The  whole  ancient  world  was  devoted  to  superstitious  rites,  and  the 
adoration  of  an  innumerable  multitude  of  gods  and  goddesses.  In  some- 
what later  times,  the  philosophers  themselves  partly  founded  systems, 
either  Atheistical  or  leading  to  Atheism  ;  partly  taught  Pantheism,  or  at 
any  rate  by  their  doctrine  of  emanations  brought  the  Creator  of  the 
world  almost  to  a  level  with  the  world  itself.  In  their  clearest  views 
they  acknowledged  only  an  architect  of  the  universe,  but  no  creator ; 
and  had  no  correct  notions  of  his  attributes  or  relations  to  mankind. 
They  did  not  worship  him,  as  St  Paul  remarks,  but  always,  as  we  find 
from  their  writings,  supported  and  recommended  the  worship  of  the 
gods.  At  this  very  time,  when  the  true  knowledge  of  God  existed  no- 
where else,  we  find  throughout  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hebrews  a  cor- 
rect doctrine  concerning  the  true  God  ;  who  is  there  represented  as  the 
creator  and  governor  of  the  world,  and  as  the  benefactor  and  judge  of 
men.  In  the  most  ancient  times,  it  is  true,  this  doctrine  was  accommo- 
dated to  the  childhood  and  the  narrow  comprehensions  of  men,  who  as 
yet  had  attained  but  a  slight  degree  of  cultivation,  and  was  accordingly 
brief,  adapted  to  the  perception  of  the  senses,  and  figurative  :  neverthe- 
less, in  the  fundamental  ideas  it  was  always  accurate  and  true.  As  the 
world  advanced  in  cultivation,  this  doctrine  was  continually  developed, 
applied,  and  more  accurately  expressed  ;  so  that,  as  in  the  laws  of  Moses, 
in  the  book  of  Job,  and  in  the  Psalms,  all  the  attributes  of  God,  and  his 
relations  to  the  world  and  to  men,  are  plainly  exhibited,  without  any 
admixture  of  the  doctrines  of  Pantheism,  of  emanations,  of  the  eternity 
of  matter,  or  of  subordinate  deities :  rocks  upon  which  the  most  sharp- 
sighted  sages  of  antiquity  have  split,  in  their  researches  on  this  subject. 
The  providence  of  God  in  particular,  of  which  so  little  was  known  with 


PKELIMINAKY    REMAKKS. 

certainty  among  other  ancient  nations,  is  here,  through  every  book,  and 
throughout  the  whole  course  of  the  history,  set  in  the  clearest  light.  If  a 
person  had  never  heard  of  the  sacred  books  of  the  Hebrews,  and  alter 
having  read  the  ancient  writings  of  other  nations,  should  for  the  first 
time  take  up  the  Holy  Scriptures,  he  would  undoubtedly  be  struck  with 
astonishment  at  this  doctrine  concerning  God,  and  be  filled  with  rever- 
ence and  esteem. — See  Leland  on  the  advantage  and  necessity  of  Reve- 
lation ;  Less  iiber  Religion,  I.  Th.  S.  1—95.  243—467  ;  NiKMAYEtt, 
Charakteristik  der  Bibel,  HI.  Th.  S.  94—124.  210—254;  Luederwald, 
Untersuchung  einiger  Zweifel  iiber  die  Aufrichtigkeit  und  Gottlichkeit 
Mosis,  1782,  S.  102—116;  Hassenkamp,  die  Israeliter  die  aufgeklar- 
teste  nation  des  Alterthums  in  der  Erkenntniss  der  Heiligkeit  und  Ge- 
rechtigkeit  Gottes.     Leipzig,  1790.] 

[6)  Man  appears,  even  in  the  very  beginning  of  these  books,  in  all  his 
dignity,  as  the  image  of  God.  In  consistency  with  this  view,  they  enjoin 
respect  even  to  foreigners  and  slaves,  who  in  all  other  nations  were  held 
in  very  little  estimation  :  Gen.  i.  26.  s.  v.  1,  3.  ix.  6,  compare  Lev.  xix. 
33.  s.  xxiv.  10,  22.  XXV.  39 — 41.  Num.  xv.  15.  Ps.  viii.  5— 10.  The 
system  of  morality  given  in  these  books  is  the  best  that  can  be  found  in 
the  whole  ancient  world,  extending  even  to  the  internal  thoughts  and  in- 
clinations ;  Exod.  XX.  17.  Deut.  vi.  4 — 9.  x.  12.  xi.  1,  &c.  The  whole 
of  the  religion  which  they  contain  tends  to  the  moral  perfection  of  men, 
and  even  the  numerous  religious  customs,  which  were  adapted  to  the  ex- 
isting state  of  character,  and  could  not  be  otherwise  without  a  complete 
failure  of  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  instituted,  were  justly  esti- 
mated as  means  of  exciting  attention,  and  never  made  objects  of  princi- 
pal concern  :  Deut.  vi.  4 — 9.  x.  12 — xi.  11.  xxx.  20.  I  Sam.  xv.  22. 
Hos.  vi.  6.  Mic.  vi.  6—8.  Isa.  i.  11—13.  Iviii.  1—14.  Ps.  xl.  6—10. 
li.  16 — 19-  &c.  Even  the  prayers  which  occur  are  not  offered  for  un- 
worthy objects,  but  for  the  most  part  aim  immediately  at  the  excitement 
of  pious  affections,  and  the  acquisition  of  knowledge  and  power  to  lead 
u  virtuous  life,  as  is  especially  evident  in  the  Psalms.  See,  for  examples, 
Pa.  i.  viii.  xv.  xix.  xxv.  xxvi.  cxix.  &c.  Jesus  professedly  founds  the 
morality  of  his  ov>a  system  upon  these  books,  when  he  affirms.  Matt.  vii. 
12.  xxii.  36 — 40.  that  the  whole  contents  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets, 
i.  e.  of  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  is  "  Thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all 
thy  mind ;  and  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself."  This  is  actu- 
ally the  centre  to  which  every  thing  in  the  religion  of  these  books  is  di- 
rected, and  consequently  the  station  from  which  all  must  be  viewed. 
He  who  has  taken  this  stand  will  be  no  more  scandalized  at  the  curses 
against  enemies  which  occur  in  the  Psalms,  than  he  would  be  at  hearing 
'hat  the  best  of  princes  had  put   his  name  to  much  greater  curse?. 


PRELIMINARY    REMARK*. 

namely,  to  the  death-warrants  of  criminals  ;  or  that  he  had  ordered  tin- 
effigy  and  title  of  a  fugitive  malefactor  to  be  affixed  to  the  gallows.  He 
who  can  maintain  that  all  this  system  of  religious  doctrine  and  worship 
was  designed,  not  for  the  promotion  of  morality,  but  for  political  purpo- 
ses, (Kant,  Religion  iiinerhalb  der  grenzen  der  bloszen  Vernunft,  S.  176,) 
must  have  merely  looked,  in  a  careless  manner,  at  scattered  portions  of 
these  books,  and  must  also  have  judged  them  by  a  standard  of  morality 

too  rigid  for  observation  by  any  but  perfect  beings. Comp.  Garve 

Uebersioht  der  Vernehmsten  Principien  der  Siltenlehre,  1798,  S.  274 — 
279;  LuEDERWALD,  Untersuchungen  einiger  Zweifel,  S.  116 — 119;  NiE- 
MATER,  Charakteristik  der  Bibel,  Th.  III.  S.  254—302  ;  Staeudlin, 
Comm.  de  Legis  Mosaicae  momento,  Goelliiigce,  1793 — 1797,  and  Theo- 
logise  Moralis  Hebraeorum  ante  Christum  Historia,  in  Comm-  Theol,  ed. 
a  Velthtjesen,  T.  II.  p.  360—394  ;  Mich^lis,  Moral,  B.  III.  1799.  S. 
59 — 416 ;  Kurzer  abrisz  der  Geschichte  des  Moral  des  Hebr.  von  R. 
1800 ;  Flatts  Apologie  der  Mosaischen  Religion,  im  Magazin  fur 
Christl.  Dogm.  und  Moral.  Th  III.  S.  76—132;  Berger,  Practische 
EinleJtung  ins  A.  T-  2  Theile.  1779,  1800,  Leipzig  ] 

[c)  Among  the  many  things  worthy  of  notice  in  this  history,  one  in  par- 
ticular perpetually  forces  itself  upon  our  observation,  namely,  how  diffi- 
cult it  was  in  ancient  times  to  attain  to  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God  : 
this  had  been  remarked  by  Plato,  who  says,  (Timaeus.  Tom.  Ill  0pp. 
p.  28,)  that  it  is  difficult  to  find  out  God,  and  yet  more  difficult  to  make 
him  known.  It  was  ouly  by  a  long  succession  of  ordinary  and  extraor- 
dinary preparations  and  events,  that  the  Hebrews  were  brought  to  re- 
main steadfast  in  the  worship  of  the  true  Geo.  Even  as  late  as  the  lime 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  of  the  Maccabees,  the  more  cultivated  He- 
brews, who  had  become  acquainted  with  the  Grecian  religion  and  philo- 
sophy, made  open  and  rapid  advances  to  the  introduction  of  idolatry. 
Their  subtle  and  violent  attempts,  although  unsuccessful,  on  account  of 
the  resistance  of  the  better  disposed  part  of  the  nation,  will  yet  remain  a 
perpetual  monument  of  the  great  truth,  that  the  knowledge  oi  the  true 
GoD  was  not  so  light  a  thing  in  the  old  world,  where  all  believed  in  a 
plurality  of  gods,  as  we  are  accustomed  to  think  it  at  the  present  day, 
when  800  millions  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  profess  his  worship.] 

[d)  It  is  this  gensral  extension  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  religion, 
presenting  them  so  nearly  and  familiarly  to  our  view,  which  prevents 
many  from  observing  and  prizing  this  inestimable  benefit,  received  from 
the  sources  mentioned  in  the  preceding  section.    They  overlook  its  value 

because  it  has  been  so  familiar  to  them  from  their  youth  up. Comp. 

Hess,  vom  Reich  Gottes,  2  Th.  8.,  especially  the  preface  to  the  first 
volume;  and  Jacobi,  Abhandlungen  iibev  wichtige  Gegenstande  der 
Religion,  III.  Th.  S.  178.  ff.] 


PRELIMINARY    REMARKS.  •» 

[On  the  subjects  of  the  whole  of  this  section,  see  an  excellent  disserta- 
tion by  Tholcck,  entitled  Hints  on  the  study  of  the  Old  Testament,  of 
which  a  translation  by  Professor  Patton  has  been  published  in  Hodge's 
Biblical  Repertory,  Vol.  III.  No.  3.  pp.  364—426.     Tr.] 

§  4.     What  is  meant  by  an  Introduction  to  the  Books  of  the  Old 
Testament. 

Since  Jesus  and  his  Apostles  valued  these  books  so  highly,  and 
since  their  antiquity  is  so  great  and  their  contents  are  so  excellent,  it 
is  of  great  importance  to  inquire,  by  what  authors  and  at  what  times 
they  were  written  ;  whether  they  have  come  down  to  us  incorrupt ; 
whether  they  are  worthy  of  belief  and  on  what  foundation  their  au- 
thority rests  ;  by  what  means  we  may  be  enabled  to  understand 
them  ;  what  external  and  internal  vicissitudes  they  have  undergone ; 
and  how  the  errors  which  perchance  have  crept  in  may  be  correct- 
ed. Such  a  critical  examination  oftlie  history  of  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,  to  the  end  that  tJiey  may  be  rightly  valued,  and  correctly 
handled  and  understood,  is  called  an  Intkoduction  to  the  Books 
OF  THE  Old  Testament,  which,  inasmuch  as  it  comprises  par- 
ticulars common  to  all  these  books,  or  such  as  are  peculiar  to  each 
individual  book,  is  called  either  general  or  particular. 

§  5.     Particulars  relating  to  the  Literary  History  of  Introductions  to 
the  Old  Testament. 

The  ancient  ecclesiastical  writers-  especially  those  who  answered 
the  adversaries  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  have  constantly 
examined  this  history  of  the  books,  and  yet  have  never  professedly 
written  on  the  subject.  Augustin  was  the  first  who  collected  the 
materials  of  this  kind  which  then  existed  with  additions  of  his  own, 
into  a  separate  work,  which  he  did  in  his  books  on  Christian  doc- 
trine (de  doctrina  Christiana.^  He  was  afterwards  followed  by 
others,  among  whom  Marcus  Aitrelius  Cassiodorus  (A.  562),  who 

published  Institutio  divinarum  Scripturarum   was  pre-eminent. In 

the  age  of  Scholastic  Theology,  whatever  related  to  the  history  of  the 
sacred  books  was  considered  as  appertaining  to  the  rudiments  of 
Theology,  and  for  that  reason  treated  of  in  the  preliminaries  (prolego- 
mena) to  that  science.     At  length,  when  the  study  of  the  Scriptures 


10  PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 

revived,  many  Introductions,  Keys,  Annotations,  Prologues,  ProIogO' 
mena,  Prefaces,  Disquisitions,  Essays,  and  Biblical  Apparata  appear 
ed.    Most  of  these  works  related  to  the  books  of  both  the  Old  and 

New  Testaments.     The  following  are  among  the  principal. The 

Bibliotheca  Sacra  of  Sixtus  Senensis  was  published  at  Venice,  in 
1566,  in  two  volumes  foUo,  and  often  reprinted,  [a]  It  was  in  every 
body's  hands,  until  in  1636  the  Officina  Biblica  of  Michael  Walter 
appeared  at  Leipzig.  This  was  in  its  turn  surpassed  and  superseded 
by  the  Thesaurus  Philologicus,  or  Clavis  Scripturse  SacraB  of  John 
Henry  Hottinger,  printed  at  Zurich  in  1649  ;  a  work  which  is 
even  yet  useful,  on  account  of  its  extensive  collections  from  Christian, 

Jewish,  and  Oriental  writings. The  Prolegomena  to  the  London 

Polyglott.  printed  in  1657,  surpasses  all  the  older  productions  of  this 
sort,  for  which  reason  it  has  been  printed  separately  even  so  late  as  1723 

and  1777. lo  these  the  Philologus  Ebrseus  of  John  Leusden, 

printed  at  Utrecht  in  1656,  and  his  Philologus  Ebraeo-mixtus,  print- 
ed at  the  same  place  in  1663,  are  inferior.  They  are,  however, 
much  excelled  by  the  Histoire  Critique  du  Vieux  Testament  of 
Richard  Simon,  published  at  Paris  in  1678  ;  an  excellent  work, 

which  nevertheless  has  had  many  adversaries. [6] The  genuineness 

only  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  treated  of  in  the  Demon- 
stratio  Evangelica  of  Peter  Daniel  Huet,  bishop  of  Avranches, 

which  was  published  at  Paris  in   1681. An  Introduction  to  the 

Old  Testament  is  combined  with  a  system  of  Archaeology  in  the  Ap- 
paratus Biblicus  of  Bernard  Lamy,  which  was  published  in  the 
French  language  at  Grenoble  in  1687.  and  has  since  been  translated 
into  Latin,  and  several  times  reprinted,  [c] The  limits  of  an  Intro- 
duction are  better  observed  in  the  Dissertation  prehminaire,  ou  Pro- 
legomenes  sur  la  Bible,  of  Louis  Ellies  Du  Pin,  published  at  Paris 
in  1701  ;[d]  and  in  Humphry  Hody's  Libri  quatuorde  textibus  Biblio- 
rum  originalibus  folio,  Oxford,  1705. — The  Dissertations  qui  peu- 
vent  servir  de  Prolegomenes  de  1'  Ecriture  Sainte  of  Augustin 
Calmet,  published  in  1715  and  1720,  and  since  translated  into  seve- 
ral languages,  treat  of  various  subjects  in  which  accurate  and  acute 
judgment  is  wanted. 

A  new  epoch  was  commenced  by  John  Gottlob  Carpzov,  in  his 
Introductio  ad  libros  Canonicos  Veteris  Testaraenti,  published  at  Leip- 


PRELIMINARY    REMARKS.  11 

zig  in  1721,  and  in  his  Critica  Sacra,  printed  at  the  same  place  in 
1728.  His  steps  were  followed  by  John  Gottfried  Eichhorn  in 
his  Einleitung  in  das  Alte  Testament,  of  which  the  third  edition  ap- 
peared, in  three  volumes  in  1803.*  The  Einleitung  in  die  gottlichen 
Schriften  des  Alten  Bundes  of  John  David  Michaelis,  published 
in  1787,  comprises  only  the  books  of  Moses  and  Job. — Leonard 
Bertholdt  has  collected  the  different  opinions  of  modern  critics  in 
his  Historisch-kritische  Einleitung  ins  Alte  und  Neues  Testament, 
Erlangen.  1812— 1814,  6  Th.  8vo.[e] 

Many  separate  pieces  relating  to  an  Introduction  to  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament  may  be  found  in  the  modern  periodical  publications, 
such  as  John  David  Michaelis's  Orientalischer  exegetischer  Biblio- 
thek,  24  vols.  8vo.  from  1771  to  1785:  his  Neuer  Orientalischer 
und  exegetischer  Bibliothek  9  vols,  from  1786  to  1793  :  John  Gott- 
fried EiCHHORNs  Repertorium  fiir  Biblische  und  Morgenlandische 
Litteratur,  18  vols,  from  1777  to  1786:  his  Allgemeine  Bibliothek 
der  Bibhsche  Literatur,  1787 — 1802  :  Eberl.  Gottl.  Paulus  Neue 
Repertorium  fiir  Biblische  und  Morgenlandische  Litteratur,  3  vols, 
and  liis  Memorabilien,  in  8  parts  :  and  Henke's  Magazin  fiir  Reli- 
gionsphilosophie  und  Kirchengeschichte,  1793 — 1803. 

[a)  The  edition  printed  at  Leyden  in  1580  and  again  in  1591,  is  valaable 
on  account  of  the  corrections  and  additions  of  John  Hay.  The  last  edi- 
tion, printed  at  Naples  in  1742,  deserves  notice  on  account  of  its  being 
dedicated  by  its  editor  the  Dominican  Milanta,  to  Benedict  XIV,  who 
accepted  the  dedication  although  the  book,  on  account  of  many  of  its 
opinions,  and  especially  on  account  of  its  numerous  corrections  of  the  fa- 
thers, was  disliked  by  many  theologians.] 

[b)  The  three  editions  of  this  work  printed  at  Amsterdam  by  the  Elze- 
virs are  very  incorrect.  From  one  of  these  a  Latin  translation  was  madt 
by  Noel  Aubert  de  Verse,  which  was  printed  at  Amsterdam,  in  1681, 
The  Rotterdam  edition  of  the  Histoire  Critique  of  1685,  corrected  by 
Simon  himself,  is  far  superior  to  any  of  the  others.]  [Simon's  work  has 
been  translated  into  English  (London,  4to.  1682)  but  by  a  person  very  in- 
competent to  the  task. — Among  the  opponents  of  Simon,  Dupin,  De  Viel, 
Le  Clerc,  and  Spanheim,  were  the  most  conspicuous.  See  Rosenmcel- 
LER  Handbuch  fiir  die  Litteratur  der  Biblische  Kritik  luid  Exegese,  I. 
Th.  S.  115— 137.     Tr.] 

[*  The  fourth  at  Goettingen  in  5  vols,  in  1823,    Tr.} 


i^  PRELIMINARY    REMARKS. 

[c)  An  English  translation  of  this  work  has  also  gone  through  several 
editions.     Tr.  ] 

[d)  It  has  also  been  translated  into'English,  and  published  under  the  ti- 
tle of  Dupin  on  the  Canon,  London,  1699,  folio.     TrJ] 

[e)  Michaelis  and  Eichhorn,  in  the  works  mentioned  by  Jahn,  first 
began  to  give  the  reins  to  that  spirit  of  hypercriticism  which  has  since  so 
gfreatly  affected  the  biblical  criticism  of  Germany.  Semler  in  his  Ap- 
paratus ad  liberalem  Veteris  Testamenti  inter pretationem,  Halm,  1773, 
and  his  Abhandlung  von  freier  Untersuchung  des  Kanon.  4.  Th.  Halle, 
1771 — 1775,  had  prepared  the  way  for  the  doubts  and  conjectures  of 
Michaelis  and  Eichhorn  and  their  followers.  Bauer  in  his  Entwurf 
einer  Einleitung  in  die  Schriften  des  Alten  Testaments,  J^urimberg  & 
Altorf,  1794,  and  in  his  Critica  Sacra  and  Hermeneutica  Sacra,  Leipzig, 
1795,  1797,  ably  followed  up  their  principles.  AuorsTi,  Grundrisz 
einer  Historisch-kritische  P^inleitung:  ins  Alt.  Test.  Leips.  1806,  and  De 
Wette,  Beytragen  zur  Einleitung  in  A.  T.  2  Th.  Halle,  1806-7,  and 
Lehrbuch  der  Hist.  krit.  Einleitung  in  die'kanonischen  und  apokryphis- 
chen  Biicherdes  A.T.,  BcrZirj,  1817(2d  ed.  1822)  are  the  principal  late 
writers  of  asimilar  character.  The  advances  to  scepticism  have  been  con- 
siderably retarded  by  the  productions  of  Jahw,  (Einleitung  in  die  Gott- 
lichen  Biicher  des  alten  Bunde«,2.  Th.  TVein,  1802,  2te.  aufl.,  and  Inlro- 
ductio  in  libros  sacros  Veteris  Foederis  in  compendium  redacta,  f^iennae, 
1805,  ed.  2da.  1815,)  and  in  some  respects  by  the  work  of  Bertholdt, 
who  is  far  from  going  to  the  lengths  of  Augusti,  Vater,  De  Wette,  Gese- 

uius,  and  some,  other  modern  German  critics. To  use  the  expression 

of  De  Wette, '  the  English  also  have  at  last  done  something  in  this  way,' 
in  the  learned  and  voluminous  work  of  the  Rev.  T.  H.  Horne,  entitled 
'An  Introduction  to  the  critical  Study  and  knowledge  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures' published  in  3  vols.  8vo.  London,  1821,  and  much  enlarged  in  three 
subsequent  editions  in  4  vols.  8vo.  the  last  of  which  is  dated  1823.  It 
has  also  been  republished  in  4  vols.  8vo.  at  Philadelphia,  1825.  An 
abridgment  published  in  12mo.  1826,  has  already  appeared  in  a  second 
and  improved  edition  al  London,  and  proposals  have  been  issued  for  a  se- 
cond edition  in  this  country. 

For  full  lists  of  the  various  introductions  to  the  Old  Testament  and  of 
their  principal  editions,  see  Jabns  Einleit.  Th.  I.  S.  21 — 29,  and  De 
Wettes  Lehrbuch  der  historisch-kritisches  Einleitung, )  6.  S.  4 — 7-  For 
historical  notices  of  this  branch  of  criticism,  see  Rosenmuelleri  Historia 
Interpretationis,  5  torn.  12mo.  Lips.  1795 — 1814,  passim,  and  Ammon's 
Preface  to  his  edition  of  ErneSti  Institutio  Interpretis  Nov.  Test. — TV.] 


PART  I. 


GENERAL  INTRODUCTION    TO   THE    SACRED   BOOKS  OF 
THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 


THE  BOOKS  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT   ARE    GENUINE,   INCORRUPT,    AND 
WORTHY    OF   CREDIT. 


§  6.     The  question  whether  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  genu- 
ine or  spurious,  is  of  the  greatest  importance. 

If  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  not  written  by  those 
authors  to  whom  they  are  attributed,  or  nearly  in  those  ages  to  which 
they  are  supposed  to  belong  [a]  but  on  the  contrary,  were  composed  by 
other  persons  at  a  much  more  recent  period — in  one  word,  if  they 
were  spurious,  the  history  contained  in  them  would  be  much  less 
worthy  of  belief;  that  plan  which  so  completely  pervades  all  the 
books-  might  have  been  foisted  into  the  history  at  a  later  period  ; 
the  ancient  miracles  recorded,  might  have  been  invented  in  a  recent 
age,  or  made  up  by  an  alteration  of  natural  events ;  the  prophecies 
might  have  been  forged  after  the  occurrence  of  the  events  which 
they  seem  to  predict ;  and  in  fine,  Jesus  and  his  apostles  would  have 
approved  of  the  works  of  impostors.  Hence  it  appears  of  how 
great  moment  is  the  question,  whether  these  books  are  genuine,  i.  e. 
whether  they  were  written  by  the  authors  whose  productions  they  pro- 
fess to  he,  and  (which  is  particularly  important  when  the  author  of 
any  book  is  unknown)  at  those  times  to  which  they  are  attributed. 


14    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

[a)  Although  the  determination  of  the  age  of  a  book  is  always  import- 
ant in  the  investigation  of  its  genuineness,  whether  the  author  be  knowB 
or  not,  yet  to  do  this  accurately  is  not  always  possible.  Often,  even 
when  the  author  of  a  book  is  known,  the  numerous  difficulties  in  chro- 
nology, and  the  disagreement  of  chronologers,  render  it  impossible  to  fix 
its  date  with  certainty.  But  when  the  author  of  a  work  is  unknown, 
or  when  he  gives  no  determinate  indications  of  the  time  in  which  he 
lived,  and  there  is  no  other  crediMe  testimony  on  this  po'nt,  tlie  evidence 
which  can  be  collected  from  the  contents  of  his  work  very  seldom  suf- 
fices to  designate  with  accuracy  the  time  in  which  the  book  itself  was 
written.  In  examining  the  genuineness  of  the  sacred  books,  therefore, 
we  must  be  content,  as  is  the  case  with  respect  to  profane  authors,  when 
we  can  nearly  ascertain  the  time  of  their  composition.  For  instance,  if 
the  author  of  the  Pentateuch  is  found  to  be  the  same  Moses,  whom  he 
professes  to  he,  the  leader  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt  to  the  promised 
land,  it  matters  not  whether  the  events  in  which  he  was  concerned  took 
place  two  or  three  hundred  years  earlier  or  later.  Consequently,  the 
Work  itself  may  have  been  written  two  or  three  centuries  earlier  or  later 
and  yet  be  equally  genuine ;  just  as  the  poems  of  Homer  and  Hesiod  are 
equally  genuine,  whether,  with  some  chronologers,  we  place  those  wri- 
ters in  the  10th  century  before  Christ,  or  with  others  in  the  9th,  or  even 
in  the  8th.  But  if  the  author  of  the  Mosaic  books  were  found  to  be  a 
Moses  different  from  the  leader  and  lawgiver  of  the  Hebrews,  and  to 
have  lived  some  time  after  the  conquest  of  Canaan,  and  to  have  pub- 
lished these  writings  of  his  own  in  the  name  of  the  more  ancient  Moses, 
then  these  books  would  be  spurious ;  just  as  the  history  of  Herodotus, 
who  flourished  at  the  commencement  of  the  Peloponnesian  war  (444 
B.  C.)  would  be  spurious,  if  it  had  been  written  (as  Jacob  Gautier  has 
supposed)  by  another  Herodotus,  who  did  not  live  before  the  time  of 
Constantine  the  Great.] 

§  7.     The  nature  of  the  arguments  used  to  prove  the  genuineness  of 

books. 

At  what  time  and  by  what  author,  any  book  may  have  been  writ- 
ten, is  a  question  of  fact  which  can  only  be  decided  by  historical 
proofs.  Historical  proofs  consist  of  the  testimony  of  witnesses 
against  whom  no  exception  can  be  taken,  competent  to  know  and 
wilhng  to  declare  the  truth  and  of  tokens  observable  in  the  contents, 
language,  style,  and  character  of  the  book  in  question,  which  show 
it  to  be  the  production  of  a  certain  author,  or  at  least  of  a  certain 
age.     The  former  is  called  external  evidence :  the  latter  internal  eci- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  15 

desnce.  The  two  united  are  abundantly  sufficient  to  prove  the  genu- 
ineness of  any  ancient  profane  writing^  and  by  parity  of  reason  no- 
thing more  can  be  required  in  the  present  question. 

§  8.    Testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

I.  Those  who  were  coeval  with  each  Hebrew  writer,  and  copied 
the  book  received  from  his  own  hands  and  afterwards  furnished 
their  copies  to  others  for  transcription,  certainly  knew  by  what 
author  and  at  what  time  the  book  was  published  ;  and  these  persons 
by  handing  down  this  book  with  definite  marks  of  its  author  and  age 
to  their  successors,  and  they  again  by  transmitting  it  to  their  poste- 
rity, and  so  on  from  one  to  another  through  all  subsequent  ages,  gave 
their  testimony  that  it  really  belonged  to  the  author  and  age  to  which 
it  made  pretensions. 

II.  This  tradition  would  be  the  more  easily  propagated  with  fide- 
lity, especially  in  the  remote  ages  in  which  the  first  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  written,  on  account  of  the  scarcity  of  books,  which 
rendered  it  less  difficult  to  retain  the  memoi-y  of  their  origin.  Be- 
sides, it  was  not  communicated  by  learned  men,  who  obscure  the 
truth  by  the  multiplicity  of  their  conjectures,  to  their  disciples,  but 
by  fathers,  faithfully  recounting  the  same  narration  a  multitude  of 
times,  to  their  children  ;  it  possesses,  therefore  the  utmost  degree 
of  certainty,  and  is  on  that  account  commended  in  Deut.  xxxii.  7.  s. 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  3 — 7.  Hence  it  happened,  that  many  authors  did  not 
subscribe  to  their  works  either  their  name  or  the  age  in  which  they 
lived.  In  those  books  to  which  the  author  had  added  his  name,  no- 
thing more  was  necessary  than  a  failhful  transcription  of  this  notice, 
which  could  be  made  with  the  greatest  ease. 

III.  There  was  no  motive  to  induce  the  Hebrews  to  corrupt  or 
alter  this  simple  tradition. 

IV.  On  the  contrary  as  at  least  the  greater  part  of  the  nation  set 
great  value  on  these  books  reason  required  that  the  account  of  their 
origin  should  be  faithfully  transmitted  to  their  posterity. 

V.  If  however  the  nation  had  been  disposed  to  betray  its  trust, 
reasons  were  not  wanting  to  induce  it  to  have  feigned  these  books  to 
be  spurious.  They  contain  many  things  which  must  have  been  dis- 
agreeable, particularly  the  continual  rebukes  and  upbraidings  be- 


16    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

stowed  upon  it,  as  a  people  indocile,  intractable,  and  obstinate.  If, 
therefore,  notwithstanding  the  unpleasant  nature  of  part  of  the  con- 
tents of  these  books  the  nation  continued  to  bear  testimony  to  their 
genuineness  it  was  a  witness  against  itself  and  on  that  account  free 
from  all  objections.  This  argument  also  tends  to  exclude  the  hypo- 
thesis that  the  histories  have  been  inserted  in  a  later  age. 

VI.  It  could  not  easily  happen  that  the  knowledge  of  the  origin  of 
these  books  should  be  corrupted  since  a  whole  tribe  had  been  con- 
secrated for  the  purpose  of  keeping  the  sacred  records,  as  well  as 
on  other  accounts.  Among  the  other  tribes  there  always  existed, 
even  during  the  Babylonish  captivity  men  such  as  the  judges  in  the 
earlier  times  and  afterwards  the  prophets  who  highly  esteemed 
these  books  for  the  very  reason  that  they  had  descended  from  the 
age,  and  from  the  authors  assigned  to  them. — If  the  names  of  some 
of  the  authors  and  even  the  times  in  which  they  lived  have  been 
forgotten  yet  the  nation  acknowledges  its  ignorance  concerning 
them  ;  which  is  a  proof  of  its  unwiUingness  to  testify  to  any  thing 
which  it  has  not  received  as  certain  from  its  ancestors.  Even  of 
these  anonymous  books  the  date  was  not  so  far  neglected  as  not  to 
leave  it  certain  that  no  one  book  was  written  later  than  the  fifth  cen- 
tury before  Christ.  This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact,  that  so  early  as 
the  third  century  before  Christ  these  books  were,  as  ancient  and 
genuine  productions  translated  into  Greek.  It  is  plain  therefore, 
that  the  books  we  have  at  the  present  day,  are  the  very  same  with 
those  to  the  genuineness  of  which  the  most  ancient  Hebrews  bore 
testimony. 

VII.  The  evidence  that  we  allege  in  favour  of  these  books  is  not 
that  of  the  modern  but  of  the  most  ancient  Hebrews  as  will  appear 
from  the  fact,  that  some  of  these  books  mention  others  of  greater 
antiquity  as  well  known,  and  cite  them  every  where  by  name.  This 
proves  that  the  authors,  who  were  themselves  ancient,  had  learned 
from  their  ancestors  that  the  more  ancient  books  were  the  genuine 
productions  of  the  authors  and  times  to  which  they  are  ascribed,  [a] 

[a)  Jahw,  Einleit.  S.  40.  ff.,  shows  at  some  length,  and  with  much 
ability,  the  rashness  and  unreasonableness  of  setting  aside  the  testimony 
of  the  Jewish  nation  to  the  genuineness  of  the  sacred  books,  a  step 
which  is  more  or  less  decisivelv  taken  bv  manv  of  the  modern  German 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 

writers.  He  shows  that  national  testimony  is,  in  fact,  the  only  solid 
ground  upon  which  a  book  can  be  received  as  genuine ;  that  it  is  far  su- 
perior in  value  to  the  positive  testimony  of  a  few  witnesses,  such  as  even 
the  best  authenticated  works  of  ancient  profane  authors  can  produce ; 
that  the  nr.gative  evidence  in  favour  of  a  hook,  which  is  afforded  by  the 
silence  of  the  nation  concerning  it,  is  necessary  to  give  credit  to  the  posi- 
tive testimony  of  individuals  ;  and  that  even  when  the  clearest  individual 
testimony  is  given  to  the  genuineness  of  a  book  by  contemporary  authors, 
national  testimony  is  necessary  to  assure  us  of  the  identity  of  the  work 
now  existing  with  that  spoken  of  by  the  early  witnesses. 

To  the  objection,  that  the  credulous  disposition  of  the  Jews  destroys 
the  force  of  their  testimony,  he  replies  by  urging  the  parallel  instance  of 
the  Greeks,  whose  character  for  historical  accuracy  was  notoriously  bad, 
yet  they  have  ever  been  deemed  competent  witnesses  to  the  genuineness 
of  their  early  writers.  The  Jews,  with  all  their  credulity,  could  never 
be  induced  to  receive  spurious  works,  for  instance,  the  book  of  Enoch, 
or  the  book  of  the  Assumption  of  Moses,  as  genuine.  The  oral  tradi- 
tions which  they  now  ascribe  to  Moses,  were  not  introduced  until  a  very 
late  period,  having  been  rejected  by  John  Hyrcanus,  and  even  by  Jo- 

sephus. The  testimony  cited  in  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  the  sacred 

books,  is  not  that  of  the  modern  Jews,  to  whom  alone  the  character  of 
credulity  applies,  but  of  those  ancient  Jews  who  lived  at  and  before  the 
time  of  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament  into  Greek.  Lastly,  allow- 
ing the  Jews  to  have  been  as  credulous  as  possible,  no  reason  would  be 
afforded  for  rejecting  their  testimony  altogether  :  it  would  merely  be  ne- 
cessary to  examine  it  with  the  greater  strictness. 

To  require  foreign  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  these  books  is  al- 
together unfair,  since  none  is  ever  required  for  ancient  profane  authors. 
Who  ever  thought  of  demanding  proof  of  the  genuineness  of  Homer  or 
Hesiod  from  foreign  nations,  e.g.  the  Phoenicians  or  Egyptians?  The 
very  nations  from  whom  such  testimony  in  favour  of  the  sacred  books,  if 
at  all  to  be  expected,  might  come,  the  Phoenicians,  Syrians,  Babylonians, 
and  Egyptians,  have  left  no  written  records.  The  Greeks'  have  no  wri- 
tings coeval  with  these  books,  and  knew  little  or  nothing  of  the  Hebrews 
or  their  language.  And  if  foreign  testimony  abounded,  the  comparative 
ignorance  of  the  history,  circumstances,  and  language  of  the  authors  of 
the  books  in  question,  under  which  a  foreigner  must  labour,  would  render 
it  far  inferior  in  value  to  that  of  the  nation  to  which  the  authors  belonged. 

Jahn  proceeds  to  show  that  there  are  vestiges  of  foreign  evidence  iu 
favour  of  the  Old  Testament  writings,  by  examining  the  testimony  re- 
specting the  history  of  Sanchoniathon,  which  if  genuine,  as  is  highly 
probable,  is  evidence  to  part  of  the  history,  and  to  the  existence  of  the 
^ooks, — evidence  contemporary  with  some  of  them,  and  at  least  4Qfi 


17 


18        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKb 

years  earlier  than  the  oldest  profane  writings  now  extant.  Comp. 
also,  HcETir  Dem.  Evang.  Prop.  IV.  c.  ii.  {  52.  ss.  }  56.  c.  iii.  J  2. 
BocHARTi  Phaleg  et  Canaan,  P.  II.  Lib.  II,  c.  ii.  MiCH^flELis  Einleit. 
in  die  Gottlieb.  Schrift.  des  A.  B.  §  44.  S.  205.  ss.  Bvdvjei  Hist.  Eccles. 
Per.  II.  sect.  ii.  §  18.  Tom.  I.  p.  782  ss.  Galk's  Court  of  the  Gentiles- 
Vol.  II.  pp.  47—58.     Tr.] 

§  9.     Internal  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament. [a] 

'%'he  internal  evidence  of  the  genuineness  of  ancient  books  is 
either  negative  or  positive. 

Negative  internal  evidence  is  that  which  is  afforded  by  the  absence 
of  any  thing  in  the  subject  and  in  the  style  of  a  book,  disagreeing 
with  the  circumstances  of  its  author,  with  the  time,  country,  and 
place,  in  which  it  was  written,  or  with  any  of  its  other  relations. 
But  as  there  is  scarcely  any  ancient  book  extant,  in  which  some 
things  incongruous  with  the  circumstances  of  its  author  and  age  are 
not  observable,  which  have  found  their  way  into  it  during  the  lapse 
of  ages,  so  it  cannot  be  denied,  that  some  such  accidents  have  oc- 
curred to  the  sacred  books.  Nevertheless,  such  interpolations  can- 
not in  any  way  be  adduced  as  proofs  of  the  spuriousness  of  the  books 
themselves. 

Positive  internal  evidence  consists  of  those  particulars  which  are 
discoverable  in  the  contents,  style,  and  other  circumstances  of  a 
book,  and  which  could  not  possibly  be  the  work  of  an  impostor,  or 
cannot  be  reconciled  with  the  supposition  of  forgery,  so  that  the 
book  in  which  they  are  contained  cannot  have  been  the  production 
of  any  other  author  or  age  than  those  to  which  it  is  ascribed. 

The  question,  whether  there  do  occur  in  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  any  things  which  are  irreconcilable  with  their  alleged 
authors  or  dates,  has  been  repeatedly  examined  by  men  of  consider- 
able abilities,  with  intentions  inimical  to  the  books ;  and  yet  all  the 
inconsistencies  noticed  by  these  men  have,  upon  a  fresh  examination, 
been  found  either  to  agree  well  with  the  history  of  the  books,  or  to 
be  interpolations. 

Positive  internal  evidence  is  not  indispensably  necessary  for  the 
proof  of  the  genuineness  of  ancient  books.  In  the  present  case, 
however,  it  exists  in  abundance,  and  is  of  a  twofold  nature. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  19 

FiHST,  the  opinion  that  these  books  are  forged,  whether  they  are 
supposed  to  be  the  production  of  one  impostor,  or  of  several  simulta- 
neously, or  of  several  in  succession,  is  contradicted  by  the  contents, 
style,  and  language  of  the  books  themselves. 

I.  In  these  books, 1)  The  simple  manners  of  the  most  ancient 

times,  their  slow  and  gradual  advancement,  their  frequent  relapses 
and  delays,  and  their  renewed  progress  even  to  the  excess  of  luxury, 
are  described  in  a  manner  perfectly  agreeable  to  the  nature  of  things 
and  men.  2)  The  ancient  history,  manners,  customs,  and  other 
circumstances  of  different  and  widely  distant  nations  are  treated  of, 
without  the  least  admixture  of  more  recent  or  incongruous  circum- 
stances.    3)  The  manner  of  thinking,   the  tropes  and  images,  the 

style,  and  the  language  itself,  are  different  in  every  book. All 

these  things  could  not  have  been  so  nicely  attended  to  had  the  books 
been  the  production  of  one  impostor  of  a  recent  age. 

II.  Not  only  1)  the  perfectly  natural  description  of  the  most  an- 
cieht  manners  and  of  their  gradation  to  the  extremes  of  luxury,  and 
2)  the  accurate  notice  of  very  diverse  historical  circumstances ;  but 
also  3)  the  correspondence  of  the  different  degrees  of  purity  of  lan- 
guage and  elegance  of  style  with  the  different  ages  of  the  books  : 
4)  the  references  in  one  book  to  another ;  and  5)  the  uniform  as- 
sumption  of  the  existence  of  the  more  ancient  books  by  those  of  a  later 
date,  cannot  be  reconciled  with  the  supposition  that  these  books  are 
the  production  of  several  impostors^who  lived  at  the  same  time  and  in 
some  comparatively  modern  age. 

III.  The  introduction  of  so  many  historical  circumstances  relating 
to  different  and  xvidely  distant  nations  and  to  different  ages,  and  yet 
all  exactly  agreeable  to  the  truth,  is  entirely  opposed  to  the  supposi- 
tion that  they  are  the  work  of  several  successive  impostors,  the  earli- 
est of  whom  must  have  hved  at  a  late  period.  That  all  of  such  a 
set  of  impostors  should  have  been  able  completely  to  avoid  error  and 
contradiction  is  impossible. 

The  same  point  is  proved.  Secondly,  by  a  comparison  of  the  con- 
tents of  the  books  with  the  motives  by  which  the  impostors,  whether 
one  or  many,  must  have  been  actuated.  For  since  no  one  is  wicked 
without  a  cause,  an  imposture  of  this  kind  cannot  be  imagined  to 
have  been  undertaken  without  some  definite  motive,  of  which  we 


20        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

can  only  conceive  of  three  ;  either  to  extol  the  Hehreio  nation^  or  to 
defame  it,  or  to  imbue  it  with  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God.  But 
as  the  many  things  stamping  ignominy  upon  the  Hebrew  nation^  that 
occur  in  these  books  are  decisive  proofs  that  they  were  not  com- 
posed with  a  view  of  extolling  that  nation ;  so  on  the  other  hand, 
the  occurrence  of  circumstances  which  are  creditable  to  the  nation, 
shows  that  defamation  was  not  the  object  of  the  author.  It  follows 
that  the  supposed  forgers  of  these  books  could  not  have  been  actua- 
ted by  either  of  the  two  first  mentioned  motives.  But  if  the  remain- 
ing one,  the  introduction  of  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God,  had 
influenced  the  impostor,  or  impostors  ;  1)  it  would  have  been  their 
interest  to  prefix  or  add  at  the  end  of  each  book  the  name  of  some 
celebrated  person,  by  way  of  giving  it  authority  ;  this  however,  is  not 
the  case  with  many  of  these  books.  2)  It  cannot  be  imagined  that 
an  indocile  and  intractable  people  would  have  received  books,  which, 
having  been  before  utterly  unknown  had  all  at  once,  with  pretensions 
to  great  antiquity  emerged  to  light  for  the  first  time,  and  which  con- 
tained a  doctrine  concerning  Goo  certainly  not  desired  by  them,  be- 
sides many  sharp  reprehensions  and  rebukes.  3)  Lastly  it  is  impos- 
sible to  imagine  impostors  so  ignorant  and  stupid,  as  not  to  per- 
ceive  that  defamation  aught  to  be  abstained  from  and  that  in  order 
to  induce  the  people  to  receive  their  forgeries  it  would  be  necessary 
to  conciliate  their  favour  by  praises,  however  unmerited. 

\d)  Comp.  EiCHH.  Einleit.  §  12,  13,  14.     TV.] 

^  10.     Of  the  manner  in  which  it  would  be  necessary  to  proceed  in  or- 
der to  prove  the  spuriousness  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

In  order  to  show  that  these  books  are  spurious  it  would  not  be 
sufficient  to  render  suspicious  the  national  testimony  already  addu- 
ced, and  the  individual  witnesses  that  will  be  produced  in  the  Par- 
ticular Introduction  ;  and  to  destroy  the  force  of  the  internal  evi- 
dence :  but,  in  addition  to  this,  the  testimony  of  the  Israelitish  na- 
tion, and  that  of  the  individuaFancient  authors,  must  be  refuted  by 
other  testimony  of  equal  or  greater  respectability  and  antiquity,  or 
such  proofs  must  be  derived  from  the  contents  and  style  of  the  books 
in  question,  as  are  irreconcilable  with  the  supposition  of  their  genu- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  21 

ineness.  Neither  of  these  has  been  as  yet  performed,  nor  can  either 
ever  be  performed  since,  as  we  have  seen,  the  evidence  in  favour  of 
these  books  is  irrefragable  and  they  are  so  circumstanced  that  it  is 
evidently  impossible  that  they  should  be  spurious.  All  the  arguments 
that  have  been  brought  against  them,  are  founded  either  on  incorrect 
interpretations  or  on  interpolations,  and  they  leave  the  genuineness 
of  the  books  totally  untouched. 

§  11.     What  is  meant  by  tJie  books  being  corrupted. 

Although,  as  has  been  already  intimated,  the  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  are  not  free  from  interpolations,  and  although  some  er- 
rors have  been  introduced  by  the  mistakes  of  transcribers  yet  they 
have  not  been  altered  with  any  fraudulent  design  nor  do  the  errors 
which  have  crept  in  materially  affect  their  sense  or  the  nature  of 
their  contents  :  they  cannot  therefore  be  called  corrupt.  For  corrup- 
tion is  a  deliberate  or  fraudulent  alteration  materially  affecting  the 
sense  so  that  what  the  author  wrote  is  lost.  Such  an  alteration  of  the 
text  is  meant  by  the  opponents  of  these  books  when  they  charge 
them  with'corruption.  On  the  other  hand,  interpolations  and  errors 
of  transcription  which  'are  sometimes  in  a  looser  sense  called  cor- 
ruptions, neither  originate  in  fraudulent  intention,  nor  materially 
affect  the  sense  of  the  book  in  which  they  may  exist  since  they  may 
generally  be  distinguished  from  the  genuine  text,  and  the  true  read- 
ing may  be  ascertained  and  restored. 

§  1 2.     That  the  Old  Testament  is  corrupted,  is  repugnant  to  history.^ 

The  supposition  that  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  have  suffered 
corruption  is  irreconcilable  with  history. 

I.  After  the  death  of  Moses,  these  books  certainly  could  not  have 
been  corrupted  so  long  as  Joshua  and  that  generation  which  was  so 
zealous  in  the  service  of  the  true  God  (Josh,  xxiv.)  survived.  But 
from  the  time  of  their  death  to  the  days  of  Samuel,  the  judges  or 
civil  governors,  who  braved  every  danger  in  defence  of  the  form  of 
government  established  in  the  sacred  books,  constantly  flourished, 
nor  were  there  wanting  among  the  priests,  Levites,  and  other  Israel- 
ites, persons  who  held  these  books  in  the  highest  esteem,  and  who 


22       GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO  THE    SACRED  BOOKS 

must  have  been  acquainted  with  their  contents,  because  they  were 
read  over  every  seven  years,  or  copies  ofthemwerein  their  possession. 
All  these  would  have  strenuously  opposed  any  attempt  to  corrupt  these 
books,  [a]  nor  did  they,  especially  the  judges  want  power  to  repress 
such  wanton  audacity  ;  at  any  rate  disputes  on  the  subject  would  have 
arisen ,  of  which  however  no  mention  is  made  in  the  book  of  Judges, 
a  work  by  no  means  sparing  in  its  notice  of  the  folhes  and  vices  of 
the  times  to  which  it  relates. 

II.  From  the  time  of  Samuel  to  that  of  Malachi  the  prophets  suc- 
ceeded each  other  in  an  almost  uninterrupted  series.  They  spared 
not  the  vices  of  princes,  priests,  or  people  and  would  on  no  account 
have  silently  passed  over  any  attempt  at  an  adulteration  of  the  sacred 
books.  Yet  not  the  least  hint  of  any  such  attempt  having  ever  been 
made  is  discoverable  in  their  writings. 

III.  After  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes,  the  books  of  Moses  at 
least  were  preserved  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  From  this  time, 
therefore  the  jealousy  which  always  existed  between  the  rival  king- 
doms was  an  insuperable  bar  to  the  success  of  any  attempt  at  cor- 
ruption in  either  kingdom :  for  in  whichsoever  the  effort  had  been  made, 
it  could  not  have  been  carried  into  effect  without  opposition  from  the  ri- 
val state,  and  consequently  not  without  public  contentions,  which  would 
have  been  mentioned  in  the  historical  books.  Moreover,  if  any  corrup- 
tion had  taken  place  during  this  period-  it  would  appear  from  a  col- 
lation of  the  Samaritan  with  the  Jewish  text  of  the  Pentateuch. 

IV.  In  the  year  740  before  Christ,  the  Israelites  from  Galilee  and 
Gilead  took  copies  of  these  books  with  them  into  Assyria  ;  in  the 
year  722  B.  C.  the  rest  of  the  Israelites  carried  copies  to  Chalachene, 
to  Gozan  on  the  banks  of  the  Chabor  and  to  the  cities  of  Media ; 
in  the  year  60G  B.  C.  Daniel  with  other  noble  youths  took  copies 
to  Babylon  :  in  the  year  595  B.  C.  Ezekiel  and  10000  other  Jews 
carried  copies  to  Mesopotamia  on  the  banks  of  the  river  Cabor :  in  588 
and  584  B.  C.  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants  of  Judea  again  carried  copies 
to  Babylon  :  in  the  same  year  588  B.  C.  some  fugitive  Jews,  among 
whom  was  Jeremiah  brought  copies  into  Egypt ;  and  others  flying 
to  Arabia  FeUx  carried  copies  with  them  there.  In  the  year  320 
B.  C.  the  Jews  transported  to  Egypt  and  Cyrene  by  Ptolemy  Lagus, 
dispersed  many  copies  in  those  regions.     Not  long  after,  others,  pe- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  23 

netrating  into  Syria,  Asia  Minor,  Greece,  and  at  last  even  to  Rome, 
carried  with  them  copies  of  the  sacred  books  into  all  those  coun- 
tries. Thus  widely  dispersed  throughout  the  world,  they  could  not 
possibly  be  corrupted. 

V.  In  the  third  century  before  Christ,  the  sacred  books  were 
translated  into  the  Greek  language,  and  again  six  several  times  in  the 
second  century  after  Christ.  In  the  course  of  time  they  were  trans- 
lated into  other  languages  and  in  this  manner  the  copies,  into  which 
any  corruption  that  might  have  been  attempted  must  hays'  been  inti-o- 
duced,  were  placed  in  the  hands  of  many  and  widely  separated  na- 
tions. Thus  we  find  that  the  further  we  trace  these  books,  the  more 
difficult  it  becomes  to  conceive  in  what  manner  they  could  possibly 
have  been  corrupted. [ft] 

[a)  Especially  as  such  attempts  were  strictly  forbidden  in  the  books 
themselves.  Deut.  iv-  2.] 

[6)  See  Gabriel  Fabricy  de  Titres  Primitives  de  la  Revelation. 
Rome,  1772.  2  torn.  8vo.] 

§  13.     The  Corruption  of  the  Old  Testament  is  in  the  nature  of  the 
thing  impossible. 

If,  notwithstanding  what  has  been  said,  the  corruption  of  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  should  be  still  insisted  on,  it  can  be  shown  to 

be    in  itself  impossible. If   the  adulteration  had    taken    place 

previously  to  the  Babylonish  captivity,  it  would  have  affected  those 
places  only  wliich  convey  censures  against  the  idolatry  then  so  much 
in  vogue,  and  the  passages  in  which  the  worship  of  one  God  is  incul- 
cated :  yet  the  slightest  inspection  shews  that  all  these  are  left  un- 
touched.  After  the  return  from   the  captivity  all  the  Jews  held 

their  sacred  books  in  such  veneration  as  to  undergo  contumely,  deri- 
sion, persecution,  and  every  sort  of  torments,  rather  than  depart  from 
their  injunctions.  Comp.  the  books  of  Maccabees,  and  Josephus 
Contra  Apion.  T.  8.  Men  entertaining  such  sentiments  certainly 
would  not  have  thought  of  corrupting  the  sacred  books  ;  nor  can  we 

imagine  what  part  they  could  have  been  induced  to  corrupt. In  the 

ages  after  Christ,  indeed,  the  Jews,  being  pressed  by  the  Christians 
with  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies  in  Jesus,   might  have  been 


24   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

tempted  to  tamper  with  these   witnesses  concerning  the  Messiah, 
But  the  least  examination  will  prove  their  innocence  of  this  crime, 

If  then  the  Jews  have  left  untouched  those  parts  which  they  had 

the  strongest  inducements  to  corrupt,  they  are  certainly  to  be  ab- 
solved from  the  suspicion  of  having  adulterated  any  other  parts. 

§  14.     Pretended  corruptions. 

Every  book  must  be  considered  as  incorrupt  until  the  contrary  is 
proved.  We  therefore  demand  from  the  opposers  of  these  books 
clear  and  indubitable  instances  of  corruptions.  Such  however  have 
not  been  given  either  by  those  of  the  Fathers  who  have  accused  the 
Jews  of  corrupting  the  Old  Testament,  or  by  those  modern  theolo- 
gians who  have  espoused  the  same  opinion. 

The  Fathers — 1)  believed  the  Alexandrine  version  to  have  been 
made  by  men  under  the  influence  of  divine  inspiration  and  perfectly 
to  accord  with  the  genuine  Hebrew  text.  Whenever  therefore  the 
Jews  cited  any  thing  from  the  Hebrew  text  in  words  diffiering  from 
that  version,  they  asserted  it  to  be  a  corruption  of  the  true  text,  and 
in  this  manner  decided  in  a  cause  to  judge  of  wliich  they  were  utterly 
disqualified  by  their  ignorance  of  Hebrew.  Hence,  2)  the  speci- 
mens of  corruptions  which  they  adduce,  have  no  bearing  on  the  sub- 
ject ;  being  nothing  more  than  different  versions  of  the  same  words, 
sometimes  better,  sometimes  worse,  sometimes  of  equal  value  with 
those  which  they  approved  ;  or  various  readings,  generally  of  httle 
moment.  Nor  3)  do  they  all  agree  in  urging  this  charge  against  the 
Jews.  Origen,  who  was  skilled  in  Hebrew-  aquits  them  of  it ;  and  Je- 
rome, although  he  generally  consents  to  the  accusation,  yet  when  he 
speaks  seriously,  defends  the  sincerity  of  the  Jews,  and  refers  to  Ori- 
gen as  his  authority.  And  even  4)  those  Fathers,  who  in  their  dis- 
putes against  the  Jews  charge  them  with  corrupting  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, are  not  always  consistent ;  for  several  of  them  in  treating  of 
other  subjects  speak  of  the  Jews  as  faithful  guardians  of  the  sacred 
books,  as  if  they  had  forgotten  what  they  had  elsewhere  asserted 
in  their  controversies  with  those  same  Jews. 

The  modern  scholastics  who  join  in  this  accusation  of  the  Jews, 
1)  being  generally  ignorant  of  the  Hebrew  language,  take  upon 
themselves  the  office  of  judge  without  possessing  the  proper  qualifi- 


0¥     I'HE    OLD    TESTAMEiN'i.  25 

:ations  ;  or  !2)  if  more  learned,  confound  errors  and  interpolations 
with  corruptions  ;  or  3)  lastly,  being  led  astray  by  too  much  zeal, 
suppose  that  they  cannot  better  defend  the  Vulgate  Latin  version 
from  the  objections  of  Protestants  than  by  aspersing  the  integrity  of 
the  Hebrew  text>  on  which  alone  the  latter  place  reliance.  Comp. 
Du  Pin,  Diss.  Prelim.  I.  iv.  4.  p.  145 — 154.  [On  the  Canon,  p.  146.  ss.] 
The  Christian  church  generally,  however  has  not  sanctioned  the 
accusation  against  the  Jews    as  is  evident  from  its  proceedings  in  all 

ages.- In  the  second  centuiy  it   received   the  Greek   versions, 

which  were  derived  from  the  Hebrew  text ;  the  version  of  Daniel  by 
Theodotion  was  even  used  in  public  worship. In  the  third  cen- 
tury the  Hexapla  of  Origen,  in  which  the  Hebrew  text  was  twice 
<;opied,  was  approved  of,  and  even  the  Alexandrine  version  altered 
to  agree  with  it ;  and  further,  this  correction  of  the  Greek  version  of 
the  Hebrew  text,  was  used  in  public  worship  by  the  churches  of  Pa- 
lestine.  In  the  sixth   and   seventh  centuries   the   Latin  church 

adopted  the  version  of  Jerome,  made  immediately  from  the  He- 
brew, which  was  again,  in  the  end  of  the  eighth  or  beginning  of  the 
ninth  century,  by  Alcuin,  and  afteiwards  in  the  sixteenth  century,  by 
the  theologians  under  the  inspection  of  Sixtus  V.  and  Clement  VIII., 

partially  corrected  by  a  comparison  with  the  Hebrew  text. These 

facts  abundantly  prove  that  the  untarnished  integrity  of  the  Hebrew 
text  has  been  acknowledged  in  all  ages,  [a] 

The  instances  of  supposed  corruptions  by  the  Jews,  which  have  beeri 
advanced  in  modern  works,  are  errors  in  various  readings,  with  perhaps 
the  single  exception  of  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  where  the  Jews  seem  to  have  al- 
tered D't'lJ  into    /T]?  for  the  purpose  of  depriving  the  Samaritans  of 

the  argutaent  in  defence  of  their  establishment  of  a  temple  and  place  of 
worship  in  Mount  Gerizim.  For  an  account  of  the  other  instances 
which  have  been  alleged,  see  Einleit.  Th.  I.  ^  14.  S.  65,  and  §  149 — 15  i- 
S.  521—538. 

[a)  The  principal  assertor  of  the  corruption  of  the  Hebrew  text  was 
John  Morin,  a  priest  of  the  Oratoiy  at  Paris,  who  maintained  his  hy- 
pothesis in  his  Exercitationes  Biblicae,  1633 — 1669.  He  was  strongly 
opposed  by  several  writers,  among  whom  the  most  eminent  was  Simon 
De  Mcis,  in  his  Assei  tio  Hebraicae  veritatis  altera,  Parisiis,  1634,  8vo. 
This  work  was  answered  by  Morin  in  his  Diatribe  Elenchica  de  Since*. 
■'tq"te  Hebrsei  Grpeoique  textus  dignoscenda,  Parisiis,  1639,  iivo.     De 

4 


26         GENERAL   INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

Muis  replied  warmly  in  his  Assertio  tertia,  Parisiis,  1639, 8vo.  Vossms, 
in  his  Chronology,  and  in  his  work  on  the  Septuagint,  espoused  the  opi- 
nions of  MoRiN,  but  with  little  strength  of  argument,  or  success.  See 
Simon,  Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  L.  I.  c.  xviii.  xix.] 

§  15.      The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  ivorthy  of  credit. 

In  order  to  constitute  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  documents 
of  unquestionable  authority,  it  is  not  sufficient  that  they  should  be 
genuine  and  incorrupt,  which  it  has  hitherto  been  my  object  to 
prove  them  ;  but  it  is  also  necessary  that  they  should  be  worthy  of 
credit.     That  they  are  so,  shall  now  be  shown. 

A  historian  is  worthy  of  credit  when  he  has  had  sufficient  oppor- 
tunities of  becoming  acquainted  with  the  truth,  and  is  disposed  im- 
partially to  declare  it.  They  may  be  said  to  have  had  opportunities 
of  ascertaining  the  truth  respecting  any  particular  transactions,  who 
have  been  natives  of  the  country  in  which  they  took  place,  or  at  least, 
have  lived  in  the  times  in  which  they  occurred,  or  who  have  been  both 
natives  and  contemporaries.  A  still  greater  degree  of  certainty  at- 
taches to  the  information  of  men  who  have  been  present  at  or  con- 
cerned in  the  transactions  which  they  describe,  or  have  been  govern- 
ors or  rulers,  who  themselves  administered  and  directed  all  the  af' 

fairs,  and  consequently  were  perfectly  acquainted  with  them  all. 

So  also  they  who  undertake  to  give  a  history  of  times  antecedent  to 
their  own,  are  the  more  worthy  of  confidence,  if  they  have  derived 
their  information  from  public  or  domestic  documents  of  tJie  country 
and  times  in  question,  especially  if  these  should  be  written  by  persons 
present  at  the  transactions  >  or  themselves  concerned  in  them  or  acting 

as  rulers. The  sincerity  of  the  narration  must  be   admitted,  if 

there  is  no  reason  to  suspect  the  insertion  of  any  thing  false,  or  the 
omission  or  misrepresentation  of  any  thing  through  partiality.  This 
must  be  allowed  to  be  the  case,  if  the  author  affords  no  ground  for 
suspicion,  but  relates  of  his  own  nation  and  its  leading  men,  of  his 
own  relations  and  connexions,  and,  if  he  took  part  in  the  transac- 
tions, of  himself,  not  only  what  is  honourable,  but  also  whatever  may 
have  occurred  that  is  disgraceful ;  and  if  he  does  not  anxiously  en- 
.  deavour  to  excuse  any  thing  of  this  latter  sort. Lastly,  the  know- 
ledge of  transactions  and  the  sincerity  of  the  account  given  of  them? 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  27 

are  much  less  to  be  called  in  question,  if  the  work  has  merited  the 
confidence  of  its  contemporaries,  who  were  competent  to  judge  of 

the  truth  of  the  facts  and  of  the  veracity  of  the  account. That 

all  these  circumstances  unite  to  prove  the  credibihty  of  the  sacred 
writers,  can  easily  be  shown. 

Moses  in  his  last  four  books  narrates  events  all  of  which  took 
place  in  his  own  time^  in  all  of  which  he  not  only  was  personally 
concerned,  but  had  command  ;  so  that  it  was  impossible  for  any  thing 

that  occurred  to  be  unknown  to  him.^ In  the  first  book  he  relates 

a  more  ancient  history  which  he  drew  from  ancient  documents  :  the 
fidelity  with  which  he  has  made  use  of  them,  appears  from  his  suit- 
able combination  of  the  different  documents  into  one  body  ;  from 
the  frequent  recurrence  of  titles  ;  from  the  difference  of  style,  of 
language,  and  of  manner  of  narration  observable  in  the  different 
fragments  ;  and  from  the  preservation  of  obsolete  words  which  he 
did  not  allow  himself  to  change  for  others,  but  thought  it  preferable 
to  retain,  ^vith  explanatory  additions. The  sincerity  of  his  narra- 
tion is  conspicuous  in  evei-y  part :  in  the  history  of  the  earlier  pe- 
riods he  is  brief  rejecting  fictions,  and  being  unwiUing  to  relate  any 
thing  doubtful  or  uncertain  :  the  faults  of  the  patriarchs,  of  his  own 
nation,  of  his  ancestor  Levi,  and  of  his  brother  Aaron  and  his  sister 
Miriam,  are  told  candidly  and  without  any  attempt  to  excuse  them  : 
he  does  not  conceal  his  own  homicide  neither  does  he  defend  him- 
self;  he  mentions  his  own  timidity,  pusillanimity,  and  indecision,  nor 
does  he  conceal  the  aid  and  counsel  which  he  received  from  others  ; 
Ex.  iii.  11.  iv.  10.  ss.  v.  22.  s.  xvii.  4.  xviii.  12 — 26.  Num.  xi. 
10—15.  xiv.  1—11.     Deut.  i.  37.   iii.  23—29.  iv.  21.  s.  xxxi.  2. 

xxxii.  50 — 52. Lastly,  what  he  had  written  he  publicly  committed 

to  the  chief  men  of  the  nation,  and  read  to  all  the  people  :  and  all 
of  them,  who  had  with  their  own  eyes  beheld  the  transactions  which 
he  had  recorded  unanimously  received  his  books  as  true. 

The  rest  of  the  historical  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  generally 

relate  events  more  ancient  than  their  own  times. 1)  It  appears 

from  their  writings  that  their  accounts  were  compiled  by  them  from 
public  and  contemporary  documents,  with  such  care  that  they  often 
preserved  even  the  w)rd3  and  phrases  of  their  authorities,  and  even 
frequently  in  express  terms  refer  their  readers  to  the  pubhc  annals 


24»  GENERAtL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE   SACRED  BOOKb 

from  wliich  themselves  had  derived  their  information.  2)  They  de» 
not  confine  themselves  to  such  matters  as  tended  to  the  honour  of 
their  nation,  but  mention  also  those  which  were  disgraceful  and  igno- 
minious ;  nor  do  they  ever  excuse  the  errors  and  crimes  of  the  most 
eminent  men.  3)  Lastly,  they  published  their  writings  while  the 
documents  and  public  annals  from  which  they  had  derived  their  ma- 
terials were  yet  in  existence,  and  might  be  consulted  by  their  readers. 
Yet  these  readers  so  highly  approved  of  their  writings,  and  so  warmly 
recommended  them  to  their  posterity,  that  they  were  more  carefully 
preserved  than  those  older  and  contemporaneous  documents,  which 
in  course  of  time  were  entirely  lost. 

Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  1)  generally  describe  their  own  actions,  and 
yet  nowhere  give  reason  to  suspect  their  veracity  :  on  the  contrary, 
many  tokens  of  a  candid  relation  appear  in  their  histories.  2)  In 
their  accounts  of  more  ancient  events,  the  manner  of  narration  is 
different,  which  shows  that  those  parts  are  taken  from  older  writings. 
3)  Lastly,  their  productions  were  received  and  approved  of  by  their 
contemporaries. 

What  the  prophets  relate  of  ancient  history,  has  been  taken  from 
the  records  just  mentioned.  In  their  accounts  of  their  own  times, 
consisting  generally  of  narratives  of  crimes  and  transgressions,  they 
are  coeval  witnesses  and  of  the  same  country,  who,  in  order  to  cor- 
rect the  morals  of  their  countrymen,  reprove  their  corruption  and 
perversity,  and  denounce  the  divine  chastisements,  although  they 
foresee  that  such  conduct  must  produce  hatred  and  persecution  of 
themselves.  No  one  ever  bore  false  witness  for  such  an  end,  with 
the  prospect  of  such  a  reward. 

Lastly,  the  contents  of  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  agree 
remarkably  with  the  accounts  of  the  most  ancient  profane  writers 
who  have  said  any  thing  concerning  the  same  nations  and  countries. 
This  agreement,  notwithstanding  the  immense  number  of  ancient  wri- 
tings that  have  perished,  has  afforded  subject  for  continual  remark  in 
my  Biblical  Archaeologj',  especially  in  the  second  part. [a]  [b] 

[a)  It  is  often  stated  as  an  objection  to  the  credibility  of  the  sacred 
historians,  that  they  were  priests,  and  consequently  disposed  to  misrepre- 
sent and  form  partial  judgments  of  events  cOTicerning  the  priesthood, 
and  especially  of  the  king?,  who  were  generally  unfavourable  to  th^ 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEKT.  29 

priesthood.  If  this  were  true,  it  would  furnish  no  reason  for  doubting 
the  correctness  of  their  slalemeni  of  fads,  but  would  merely  affect  their 
judgment  in  relation  to  them,  and  to  the  characters  of  the  kings.  But  it 
is  not  true  that  all  the  sacred  historians  were  priests..  For  instance,  along 
with  the  priest  Ezra  we  find  the  layman  Nchemiah.  Who  the  authors  of 
the  ancient  annals  of  the  kingdom  were,  we  do  not  know,  therefore  can- 
not maintain  that  they  were  priests  :  but  we  do  know  that  these  annals 
were  first  commenceil  by  genealogists,  and  from  many  passages  of  the 
books  of  Chronicles,  that  they  were  continued  by  prophets,  who  were  as 
often  laymen  as  priests.  After  all,  if  the  abstracts  contained  in  Joshua^ 
Judges,  I.  and  U.  Samuel,  I.  and  II.  Kings,  and  I.  and  II.  ChronicleSjWere 
really  made  by  priests,  their  representations  and  judgments  of  events  are 
as  much  entitled  to  our  confidence  as  if  composed  by  laymen,  since  they 
agree  perfectly  with  those  of  the  prophets,  whose  repeated  reproofs  and 
exhortations  to  the  priests  prove  that  they  had  no  prepossessions  in  favour 
of  the  priesthood.] 

[6)  On  the  confirmation  of  the  sacred  history  by  profane  writers,  see 
Gray's  Connexion  of  Sacred  and  Profane  Literature,  Vol.  I.,  and  Fa- 
ber's  Horse  Mosaicse,  Vol.  I.  Horne's  treatment  of  this  subject,  In- 
trod.  Vol.  r.  Chap.  III.  Sect.  II.  \  1.,  is  well  worth  perusal.     Tr.] 

§  16.     The  miracles-,  accounts  of  which  are  contained  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament are  true  miracles. 

If  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are  genuine  and  incorrupt,  the 
many  miracles  which  they  relate,  cannot  possibly  be  supposed  false, 
unless  we  are  willing  for  the  sake  of  getting  rid  of  them,  to  grant 
other  things,  which,  in  fact,  would  amotmt  to  much  greater  miracles. 
For  if  Moses  wrote  the  books  which  we  have  under  his  name  in  the 
same  age  in  which  the  transactions  recorded  in  them  occurred,*  and 
read  them  or  caused  them  to  be  read  to  the  people,  and  yet  forged 
the  accounts  of  miracles  contained  in  them  ;  he  must  have  falsely  as- 
serted in  the  face  of  myriads  of  his  contemporaries  1)  that  in  Egypt, 
at  his  command,  all  the  waters  had  for  some  days  assumed  the  appear- 
ance of  blood ;  that  darkness  had  covered  the  land  for  three  days  ;  and 
that  a  terrible  tempest  had  destroyed  every  thing  exposed  to  its  fury,  and 
again  ceased  its  ravages  at  his  command :  he  must  have  falsely  as- 
serted to  the  vast  multitude  of  tlie  Hebrews  who  at  that  time  were 
any  thing  but  credulous,  2)   that  at  his  command  the  Heroopolitan 

"   fDeut.  xi.  2—7.  xxix.  1—10,  &c.l 


30   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

branch  of  the  Red  sea  had  become  dry  and  that  they  themselves  had 
passed  it  in  safety  and  that  the  Egyptian  army  attempting  to  follow 
them  by  the  same  road  had  been  drowned  by  the  returning  waves  :  he 
must  have  falsely  asserted  to  this  numerous  people,  3)  that  in  Ara- 
bia Petrcea  twice,  in  a  scarcity  of  water  a  rock  had  after  his  previ- 
ous annunciation  upon  the  stroke  of  a  wand  sent  forth  a  quantity  of 
water  sujlcient  to  quench  the  thirst  of  nearly  two  and  a  half  millions 
of  men  beside  an  innumerable  multitude  of  cattle  and  he  must  have 
needlessly  added  that  at  the  second  time  he  himself  had  somewhat 
doubted  the  effect  of  the  attempt  and  that  therefore  he  had  been  ex- 
cluded from  the  long-expected  land  of  promise;  Num.  xx.  7 — 13. 
Deut.  i.  37.  iii.  23—29.  iv.  21.  s.  xxxi.  2.  xxxii.  60—52.  He  must 
have  falsely  asserted  4)  that  the  whole  nation  had  during  the  greater 
part  of  forty  years  been  principally  sustained  upon  manna  which  is 
ordinarily  of  rare  occurrence  in  those  regions-  and  possessed  it  in 
such  plenty  as  to  have  contemned  it  (Num.  xi.  4 — 10.  Deut.  viii.  3,) 
and  yet  it  had  never  been  found  upon  the  Sabbath  day  Ex.  xvi.  13 — 29. 
Lastly,  he  must  have  falsely  asserted  6)  that  according  to  his  previ- 
ous annunciation  they  themselves  at  Mount  Sinai  in  Arabia,  (where 
during  the  summer  season  clouds  are  seldom  seen,  at  the  most  being 
small  and  fleeting  and  disappearing  early  in  the  morning,)  had  seen 
in  the  month  of  July  or  August  a  terrible  cloud  vnth  perpetual  light- 
nings and  thunderings  and  heard  a  divine  voice  ivhich  had  published 
their  laws ;  (Deut.  iv.  32 — 37.  v.  4.  s.  ^2 — 27  ;)  and  that  at  other 
times  they  had  seen  above  their  tabernacle  a  remarkable  cloud  which  had 

emitted  a  fiery  splendour  in  the  night. All    these  things  Moses 

must  have  falsely  asserted  while  all  the  people  must  have  believed 
his  fictions,  and  moreover,  reverenced  as  an  ambassador  of  the 
Deity  a  man  rendered  infamous  by  so  many  and  such  open  lies,  and 
received  from  him  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  and  a 
burdensome  law  and  rendered  to  him  obedience  :  all  this  too,  on  ac- 
count of  those  very  miracles  which  they  themselves  must  have  known 
never  to  have  taken  place.  To  induce  the  Hebrews  thus  to  believe 
all  the  falsehoods  advanced  by  Moses  it  would  have  been  necessary 
by  a  continual  series  of  miracles  so  to  influence  the  minds  of  all  and 
each  of  them  as  to  persuade  them  that  they  themselves  had  really 
seen  and  experienced  all  that  was  related  concerning  the  passage  of 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  31 

the  Red  sea,  the  miraculous  supply  of  water,  the  manna  ate  for  so 
long  a  time  even  to  satiety,  &c.,  although  in  fact  it  was  all  false. 
If  therefore,  the  miracles  of  Moses  had  been  false,  still  greater  and 
more  numerous  miracles  must  have  been  perpetually  wrought  upon 
the  minds  of  the  Hebrews  to  induce  them  to  believe  things  true- 
which  they  knew  to  be  entirely  unfounded,  [a] 

[a)  Many  have  undertaken  to  show  that  the  miraculous  histories  in 
the  Old  Testament  were  merely  natural  events,  and  that  they  admitted 
ofeasy  explanations  on  known  principles  of  philosophy.  With  relation  to 
some  of  them  this  undoubtedly  is  the  case.  Still  there  are  others  which 
have  never  yet  been  explained  without  the  most  forced  constructions, 
and  it  is  but  labour  lost  to  attempt  the  explanation  of  some  of  them  on 
any  natural  principles  known  to  man.  Allowing,  however,  that  it  were 
possible  to  account  for  all  the  Mosaic  miracles  on  mere  natural  principles 
with  perfect  ease,  their  supernatural  character  would  still  remain.  For 
being  confessedly  extraordinary,  however  natural,  it  must  have  been 
utterly  out  of  the  power  of  any  one  beside  the  Creator  and  Governor  of 
the  world  to  foresee  the  time  and  circumstances  of  their  occurrence. 
The  fact  that  these  were  exactly  predicted  by  Moses  is  a  sufficient  proof 
of  the  supernatural  agency  in  the  events  in  question.] 

§   17.      The  hooks  of  the  Old  Testament  contain  true  ■prophecies. 

If  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were  written  about  the  times  to 
which  they  are  ascribed,  and  have  remained  incorrupt  it  is  impossible 
that  the  several  prophecies  contained  in  them  should  not  be  divine. 
For  particular  contingent  events  are  definitely  predicted  at  so  remote 
a  period  that  either  their  efficient  causes  did  not  then  exist,  or  they 
were  so  far  beyond  the  scrutiny  of  the  most  sagacious  of  mankind- 
that  no  one-  unless  assisted  by  superior  illumination,  could  have  pre- 
dicted what  was  to  come  to  pass.  A  few  examples  shall  be  pro- 
duced. 

I.  The  propagation  of  the  knowledge  of  the  one  God  and  of  true 
Teligion,  among  all  nations,  by  the  agency  of  the  Hebrews,  was  an- 
nounced twenty-two  centuries  before  Christ,  to  the  patriarchs  Abra- 
ham, Isaac,  and  Jacob,  Gen.  xii.  3.  xviii.  18.  s.  xxii.  18.  xxvi.  4. 
xxvui.  14.,  and  was  afterwards  plainly  predicted  by  the  prophets 
with  the  addition  of  many  of  the  circumstances  of  the  event ;  Mic. 
iv,  1_7.  vii.  20.    Isa.  ii.  2—4.  xi.  1— II.  lii.  13— liii.  Ixvi  19—2.". 


^2         GExNERAL  INTRODUCTION   TO  THE  SACRED  BOOK& 

Amos  ix.  11.  s.  Ezek.  xvii.  22.  ss.  J^r.  iii.  17.  xvi.  19 — 21.  Ps< 
Ixxxvii,  &c.  &c.  That  these  predictions  have  been  fulfilled,  we  all 
can  testify, 

II.  That  the  tribe  of  Judah  should  always  have  the  principality  is 
tbretold  in  Gen.  xlix.  8 — 10    comp.  Ps.  Ix.  7.  cviii.  8.  I.  Chr.  xxviii. 

,4,  and  has  been  so  literally  accomplished  in  all  the  course  of  historyr 
that  at  last  all  the  Israelites  are  denominated  Jews  from  the  tribe  of 
Judah. 

III.  The  prediction  tha:t  the  Messiah  should  spring  from  thie  tribe 
of  Judah,  and  from  the  family  of  David  so  often  announced  with 
different  accompanying  circumstances,  and  even  at  times  when  there 
seemed  to  be  not  the  least  hope  of  its  fulfilment,  was  at  last  accom  - 
plished  by  the  birth  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  II.  Sam.  vii.  1.  ss.,  espe- 
cially 12—17,  comp.  Ps.  Ixxxix.  36—40.  Isa.  xi.  1—10.  Iii.  13— liii. 
12.  Hos.  iii.  4.  s.  Amos  ix.  11.  Mic.  v.  1 — 3.  Jer.  xxiii.  1 — 8. 
XXX.  4 — 1 1 .  Ezek.  xvii.  22.  ss.  xxi.  29 — 32.  (24 — 27.)  xxxiv.  22 — 30. 
xxxvii.  24—28.  Dan.  ix.  1 — 27.  Zech.  ix.  9.  s.  Mai.  iii.  1.  s. 
comp.  Ps.  ex.  1.  ss. 

IV.  That  the  Hebrews  for  the  chastisement  of  their  idolatry  and 
the  wickedness  of  their  lives  should  suffer  captivity  among  a  distant 
people,  and  that  they  should-  in  conseqvence  of  this  captivity,  turn  to 
the  true  God.  and  be  brought  back  to  Palestine  and  recover  their 
existence  as  a  nation,  was  predicted  as  early  as  the  time  of  Moses, 
Deut.  xxviii.  49—63.  xxix.  21 — 27.  xxx.  1 — 10.  xxxi.  16 — 22,  and 
was  afterwards  frequently  declared  with  greater  minuteness  by  later 
prophets.  All  these  things  are  foretold  of  the  ten  tribes  by  Hosea. 
c.  i.  4 — 11.  ii.  10 — 23.  xi.  5 — 11.  xiv.  1 — 8  ;  by  Amos,  c.  v.  27. 
IX.  1 — 15  ;  by  Micah,  c.  i.  12 — 16  ;  and  by  Isaiah,  c.  viii.  1 — x.  24. 
Of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  they  were  predicted  by  Micah,  c.  iii.  12. 
iv.  8 — 11  ;  by  Isaiah,  c.  xxxix  ;  by  Jeremiah,  who  even  mentioned 
70  years  as  the  duration  of  the  captivity,  c.  xxv.  11.  ss.  xxix. 
10—14.  xlvi.  27.  s.  1.  19—23,  34  ;  and  by  Ezekiel,  c.  xxviii.  25.  s. 
xxxvi.  xxxvii.  Zechariah  speaks  plainly  of  their  condition  after 
fheir  return,  ix.  1 — 8,  11 — 17.  x.  vi.  9 — 15. 

V.  The  prophecy  of  Jeremiah,  c.  1.  and  li.  concerning  the  over- 
throw of  Babylon,  comprising  all  the  circumstances  of  the  event, 
.»nd  yet   not   fully  accomplished  until  a  thousand  years  after  the 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  33 

prophet's  age,  is  liighly  deserving  of  notice. Those  who  maintain 

that  the  Hebrew  prophets  brought  about  the  accompHshment  of  their 
own  predictions,  should  show  how  Jeremiah  effected  this  overthrow, 
with  all  its  circumstances.  For  more  concerning  it,  see  Germ.  In- 
trod.  Th.  I.  §  17.  S.  82— 84.  [a] 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  section,  Part  II.  }  73 — 80  of  this  work  may 
be  profitably  consulted.     TV.] 

§  18.     The  Old  Testament  contains  a  divinely  revealed  religion. 

If  the  miracles,  announced  before  their  performance,  cannot  possibly 
have  been  fictitious  ;  and  if  the  prophecies,  so  remarkably  clear  and 
definite,  were  pubhshed  many  centuries  before  the  occurrence  of  the 
events  foretold ;  it  is  certain  that  neither  could  have  been  the  per- 
formances of  men  left  to  themselves,  and  destitute  of  divine  assist- 
ance and  instruction  ;  but  they  must,-  as  the  performers  of  the  mira- 
cles and  the  prophets  themselves  asserted-  have  originated  with  the 
omnipotent  and  omniscient  creator  and  ruler  of  the  universe.  But 
as  it  appears  from  the  history,  and  is  frequently  expressly  declared, 
(e.  g.  Ex.  iv.  5,  8.  s.  vu.  5,  17.  viii.  18.  ix.  16,  29.  x.  1.  s.  xix.  9. 
Num.  xvi.  28.  Isa.  vii.  10 — 16.  xxxviii.  7.  s.  xliv.  7.  xlv.  6.  s. 
xlviii.  3 — 16.  Zech.  ii.  9,  11.  iv.  9.  vi.  15,)  that  these  extraordi- 
nary works  and  prophecies  were  given  as  testimonies  that  the  men 
who  performed  them  were  commissioned  with  special  mandates  from 
the  Deity  they  certainly  are  evident  proofs  that  those  men  received 
divine  commands  and  revelations,  and  consequently,  that  the  doctrine 
which  they  have  taught  in  their  books  is  divine. [a] 

[a)  Jahn  in  his  German  work  adds  a  note  of  some  length,  in  order  to 
show  the  necessity  and  sufficiency  of  miracles  and  prophecy  as  proofs  of 
a  divine  revelation. — — He  takes  notice  also  of  the  opinions  of  Kleuker. 
who  in  his  Priifung  der  vorziiglichsten  Beweise  fiir  die  Wahrheit  des 
Christenthums,  I.  Th-  S.  276.  ff.  had  maintained,  that  the  miracles  of  the 
Old  Testament  had  for  their  only  object,  partly  the  deliverance  of  the 
Hebrews,  and  partly  the  supply  of  certain  wants  of  the  times  in  which 
they  occurred.  But  this  is  only  their  secondary  object.  Their  primary 
object,  the  proof  of  a  divine  revelation,  is  often  expressly  noticed.  See 
the  texts  above  referred  to.     TV.] 

.5 


«• 


CHAPTER  II. 


ox  THE   DIVINE    AUTHORITY   AND  CANON   OF   THE    BOOKS    OF   THE 
OLD    TESTAMENT. 


§  19.     Their  divine  authority  or  inspiration. 

Although  it  has  been  proved,  that  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament 
contain  divine  revelations,  yet  it  cannot  thence  be  concluded  that 
these  revelations,  and  every  thing  else  related  in  those  books,  are  of 
divine  authority.  Miracles  and  prophecies  were  not  granted  to  all 
the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament,  nor  were  they  performed  for  the 
purpose  of  proving  the  divine  authority  of  their  books. To  con- 
stitute these  books  of  divine  authority  then  it  is  necessary  that  their 
writers  should  have  been  preserved  from  all  error  by  supernatural 
assistance.  The  divine  assistance  granted  for  the  purpose  of  prevent- 
ing error,  is  designated  by  the  term  inspiration,  a  name  long  since 
received  in  the  schools,  but  not  exactly  suitable  :  for  this  assistance 
does  not  inspire  or  teach  any  thing  which  is  the  office  of  revelation, 
but  merely  prevents  the  commission  of  error.  It  is  of  importance 
never  to  lose  sight  of  this  idea  of  inspiration,  and  carefully  to  guard 
against  confounding  it  with  that  of  revelation,  an  error  into  which  men 
in  other  respects  learned  have  not  unfrequently  fallen,  and  which  has 
been  instrumental  in  bringing  reproach  upon  the  doctrine  of  inspira- 
tion. 

§  20.     The  nature  of  the  argument  for  inspiration. 

The  divine  assistance  for  the  prevention  of  error  is  an  internal  su- 
pernatural operation,  which  can  be  known  only  to  God  and  to  him 
to  whom  it  is  revealed  by  God.  The  inspiration  of  a  writer,  there- 
fore, can  only  be  proved  by  divine  testimony.  Nevertheless,  nothing 
more  can  be  required  than  that  a  man,  who  has  proved  his  divine 


II 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  35 

mission  by  miracles  or  prophecies,  should  assert  that  the  book  or 
books  in  question  are  free  from  error.  Furthermore,  it  is  not  ne- 
cessary that  this  divinely  commissioned  person  should  make  such  an 
assertion  in  express  terms  since  perhaps  no  suitable  occasion  might 
be  afforded  him.  It  is  sufficient  if  he  uses  and  cites  the  books  in 
question  as  divine,  which  is  satisfactory  evidence  that  he  is  himself 
convinced  of  their  divine  authority.  The  proof  thus  afforded  becomes 
stronger,  if  in  the  age  in  which  this  person  lived,  divine  authority 
should  have  been  attributed  to  the  books.  Any  suspicion  of  accom- 
modation to  vulgar  prejudices  that  might  arise  in  this  case  is  destroy- 
ed by  the  very  fact  of  his  caUing  the  books  divine,  or  ascribing  them 
to  God  or  to  the  Holy  Spirit  while  himself  was  invested  with  the  divine 
commission,  since  such  conduct  would  be  inconsistent  with  sincerity 
if  he  did  not  really  believe  them  to  be  divine. 

^  21.     Whether  the  Jews  possessed  any  testimony  respecting  the  in- 
spiration of  the  Old  Testament. 

Not  only  the  writers  of  the  Talmud,  but  also  Philo,  de  Vita  Mosis, 
Lib.  II.,  JosEPHUs,  Contra  Apion,  Lib.  I.  c.  viii.,  and  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament,  Jo.  v.  39.  x.  34.  ss.  Mat.  xxii.  43.  Ac.  i.  16.  xxviii. 
25.  Gal.  iii.  16.  Heb.  i.  5.  iii.  7.  x.  15.  xii.  25.  &c.,  testifjs  that  the 
inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament  was  an  article  of  faith  of  the  Jews 
in  the  time  of  Christ.  They  seem  to  have  inferred  it  1)  from  the 
fact  that  most  of  the  writers  of  the  Old  Testament  were  prophets, 
whence  they  concluded  that  men  who  spoke  by  divine  authority, 
must  also  have  written  by  the  same,  and  in  writing  as  well  as  in 
speaking,  must  have  received  a  special  divine  assistance,  which  would 
seem  to  have  been  the  more  necessary  in  those  prophecies  with  res- 
pect to  which  the  prophets  confessed  that  their  productions  were  un- 
intelligible to  themselves. 2)  What  added  strength  to  this  conclu- 
sion was  that  some  of  the  sacred  writers  were  commanded  to  write 
by  God  himself  as  Moses,  Ex.  xvii,  14.  xxxi.  18.  xxxii.  15.  s.  xxxiv. 
l,27.s.  Deut.  ix.  10.  s.  x.  1.  xxxi.  19,  25 ;  Isaiah,  c.  viii.  1.  xxx.  8  ; 
Habbakuk,  c.  ii.  2  ;  Jeremiah,  c.  xxx.  2.  xxxvi.  2  ;  Ezekiel,  c.  xxiv. 
2,  xliii.  11,  and  Daniel,  c  xii.  4  :  whence  they  rightly  concluded, 
that  God  had  either  foreseen  that  these  men  wOuld  write  without 
committing  any  errors,  or  by  affording  them  his  particular  assistance- 


36       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    SACRED  BOOKS 

had  taken  care  that  no  errors  should  be  admitted. 3)  The  He 

hrews  seem  to  have  received  the  other  historical  books  as  either 
written  or  approved  of  by  prophets,  since  they  were  so  firmly  con- 
vinced of  their  perfect  correctness,  as  to  neglect  the  coeval  re- 
cords from  which  they  had  been  compiled. 4)  To  the  rest  of  the 

sacred  books,  the  Hebrews  seem  to  have  attributed  divine  authority 
on  the  testimony  of  some  prophet  perhaps  of  Haggai  Zechariah, 
or  Malachi. All  these  reasons  however  are  by  no  means  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose  :  we  require  some  other  more  certain  testi- 
mony of  the  divine  authority  of  these  books,  which  shall  extend  equal- 
ly to  them  all. 

§  22.    Testimony  for  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament. 

The  testimony  necessary  to  prove  the  divine  authority  of  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament  is  supplied  by  the  New  Testament.  For 
whereas  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  Jesus  maintained  the  inspiration  of 
these  books  he  not  only  did  not  deny  it  but  on  the  contrary  constant- 
ly considered  it  as  certain,  recommended  them  to  others,  and  even  call- 
ed them  in  express  words  the  divine  law  the  divine  scriptures^  and  the 
words  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  of  God;  Mat.  xi.  13.  xv.  3 — 6.  xix. 
2—6.  xxii.  31,  43.  xxvi.  54.  Lu.  xvi.  16,  29,  31,  xviii.  31.  xxiv.  25 
—27,  44—46.  Mar.  vii.  9,  13.  Jo.  v.  39,  46.  x.  34.  ss. The  tes- 
timony thus  given  was  so  clear  and  free  from  all  ambiguity,  that  it 
was  impossible  for  the  Apostles  to  mistake  its  sense.  Accordingly, 
they  make  use  of  these  books  as  of  productions  undoubtedly  divine, 
and  recommend  them  in  the  strongest  terms  to  others  as  the  divine 
scriptures  and  the  words  of  God.  This  they  did.  not.  as  might  have 
been  the  case  in  connivance  at  the  vain  prejudices  of  the  Jews  con- 
verted to  Christianity,  but  also  when  addressing  the  converted  Gen- 
tiles- who  had  no  prejudices  on  this  subject  which  could  have  re- 
quired any  accommodation  ;  Acts  iii.  18.  ss.,  25.  xxviii.  25.  Rom. 
i.  2.  iv.  2—24.  Gal.  iii.  8,  16.  Heb.  iii.  7.  xii.  27.  I  Pet.  i.  11.  H  Pet. 

i.  21.  &c. But  of  all  similar  passages,  that  in  H  Tim.  iii.  14 — 17. 

is  most  worthy  of  notice,  since  there,  as  is  evident  from  the  scope  of 
the  place,  Paul  asserts  that  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  were 
written  with  the  divine  assistance,  Giortvtvonovi :  comp.  Germ.  Tn- 
trod.  P.  I.  §.  22.  S.  97—100. That  all  the  Apostles  agreed  in 


I 


OF    THB    OBB    TESTAMENT.  37 

their  testimony  to  Uhis  effect,  is  testified  by  the  ancient  church, 
which  taught  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  with  unanimous  consent 
inserted  the  inspiration  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  among  its 
articles  of  faith.  This  appears  from  the  most  ancient  creeds  such 
as  those  contained  in  the  Second  Apology  of  Justin  Maktyr,  in 
iBENAsut.  Adv.  Haer.  In.  I.  «.  10.  im  ^Riesir's  Prelkee  te  his  books 
««pt  oparwj',  and  ia  the  creed  of  Gregory  Thacmaturgits  and  from 
the  assent  of  a  multitude  of  fathers  to  these  creeds  for  proof  of 
which  see  Du  Pin,  Prol,  sur  la  Bible,  p,  48.  ss.  [©n  the  Ganon  p. 

49.  ss.]. If    as  many  contend   Jesus  and   his  apostles,  in  their 

declarations  on  this  subject  only  intended  to  connive  at  the  opinion 
of  the  Jews  they  at  least  could  not  have  asserted  that  these  wri- 
tings were  divine,  and  the  word  of  God. The  supposition  of  some 

that  the  ancient  Jews  who  were  accustomed  to  refer  all  natural  and 
eminent  endowments  immediately  to  God  called  certain  books  divine 
merely  as  an  expression  of  excellence  and  that  Jesus  and  his  Apos- 
tles used  the  apellation  in  that  sense,  is  false  ;  for  this  sense  is  en- 
tirely in  opposition  to  the  scope  of  St.  Paul,  II  Tim.  iii.  14 — 17.  not 
to  mention  that  Philo.  de  Vita  Mosis  L.  II.  and  Josephus  Cont. 
Apion.  L.  I.  §  8.  have  accurately  marked  out  the  divine  authority  of 
their  sacred  books.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  I.  §  22.  pp.  101 — 
103.  [a] 

[a)  On  the  hypothesis  of  acconimodation  See  Storr.  De  Sensu  Histo- 
rico,pawiwi ;  Opuscula  Tom.  I.  pp.  1 — 88.  (translated  and  published  sepa- 
rately at  Boston,  in  1817,  by  J.  W.  Gibbs,)  and  Storr  and  Flatt's 
Biblical  Theology,  Vol.  I.  pp.  228—232.  Schmucker's  Trans.     Tr.] 

§  23.     The  limits  of  Inspiration. 

Neither  Jesus  nor  his  Apostles  have  determined  how  far  the  di- 
vine authority  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  extends.  Hence 
different  sentiments  on  this  point  prevailed  at  an  early  date.  Some 
of  the  Fathers  defended  the  opinion  that  inspiration  consisted  mere- 
ly in  freedom  from  error  :  others  asserted  that  every  word  was  in- 
spired so  that  the  authors  were  mere  instruments  of  the  Holy  Spirit : 
yet  these  last  were  not  always  consistent  but  sometimes,  forgetful  of 
wliat  they  had  elsewhere  written,  only  contended  for  a  prevention  of 


38   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

errors.  As  both  parties  agreed  in  the  main  points  these  lesser  dil- 
ferences  produced  no  controversy. Among  the  modem  scholas- 
tics, some  seized  upon  those  passages  of  the  Fathers  in  which  nothing 
more  than  a  preservation  from  error  was  asserted.  Others  urged 
those  in  which  the  strictest  notion  of  inspiration  is  exhibited  ;  extend- 
irig  it  to  the  writer's  determination  to  write-  to  the  choice  of  subjeots 
and  words,  and  to  the  order  of  both.  The  Christian  world  was  divided 
between  these  two  parties  ;  in  some  provinces  the  former  sentiment 
prevailed  ill  others  the  latter.  This  last  was  the  case  in  the  Nether- 
lands whence  it  came  to  pass  tbat  when  the  Jesuits  had  in  pubhc 
theses  defended  the  looser  notion  of  inspiration  three  propositions[a] 
were  in  1 586  condemned  by  the  doctors  of  theology  at  Louvain  and 
Douay  although  this  condemnation  did  not  meet  with  the  approba- 
tion of  the  rest  of  the  Catholics  or  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  himself. 
The  council  of  Trent  did  not  decide  this  scholastic  dispute ,  and  by 
consequence  many  orthodox  divines  have  defended  the  lower  notion 
of  inspiration.  One,  the  most  eminent  among  these,  was  Henry 
Holden,  a  doctor  of  the  Sorbonne^  who  contended  that  the  divine 
assistance  in  preventing  errors  extended  only  to  those  parts  which 
are  either  solely  doctrinal   or  have  a  close  and  necessary  connexion 

with  doctrine. Some  others,  who  are   mentioned  by  Melchior 

Canus,  de  Locis  Theolog.  L.  II.  c.  x.  have  defended  the  opinion 
that  inspiration  did  not  prevent  lesser  errors  the  result  of  which  is 
nearly  the  same  with  that  of  the  one  maintained  by  Holden. 

Most  of  the  Protestants  formed  a  very  strict  idea  of  inspiration, 
and  defended  it  as  late  as  the  middle  of  the  18th  century.  But  after 
the  publication  of  the  learned  work  of  Toellner  on  inspiration  in 
1772  and  of  Semler's  examination  of  the  Canon  1771 — 1773-  many 
undertook  to  investigate  the  doctrine  of  inspiration-  and  gradually 
relaxed  in  their  views  of  it  until  at  last  they  entirely  banished  the 
doctrine  so  that  at  present  but  few  admit  it. [6]  Others  attribute  to 
the  sacred  books  a  go  t  of  divine  authority  only  in  this  sense<»that 
they  contain  certain  divine  truths  not  at  all  solicitous  whetherj^ey 
were  committed  to  writing  by  divine  authority  or  not.[c]  ** 

[a)  The  propositions  are  : — 
Ut  aliquid  sit  scriptura  sacra,  non  est  necessarium,  singula  ejus  verba 
esse  inspirata. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  39 

Non  est  necessarium,  ut  singulae  yeritates  et  jententiae  sint  immediate 
a  Spiritu  Sancto  ipso  scriptori  inspiratae. 

Liber  aliquis,  qualis  est  fortasse  secundus  Maccabaeorum,  humana  in- 
dustria  sine  assistentia  Spiritus  Sancti  scriptus,  si  Spiritus  Sanctus  postea 
testetur,  ibi  nihil  esse  falsum,  efficitur  Scriptura  Sacra.] 

[b)  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  suggest  to  the  reader,  that,  although  the 
author  expresses  himself  in  general  terms,  his  remarks  are  intended  to 
apply  to  the  Protestants  of  his  own  country.     TV.] 

[c)  Jahn  enters  more  fully  into  the  details  of  the  history  of  the  doc- 
trine of  inspiration,  in  his  Germ.  Introd.  Th.  I.  S.  104 — 111. A  lumi- 
nous statement  of  the  various  modifications  of  this  doctrine  is  given  by 

MoSHEiM,  Elem.  Theol.  Dogmaticse,  Tom.  I.  pp.  127 — 145. Rose, 

in  his  View  of  the  present  state^of  Protestantism  in  Germany,  pp.  125, 
ss.,  gives   a   succinct  account  of  the   opinions  upon    this  subject   which 

have  prevailed  among  certain  German  writers. An  able  view  of  the 

question  may  be  found  in  Storr  and  Flatt's  Biblical  Theology,  Vol.  I. 
pp.  242—250.  (Schmuckers  Trans.)     TV.] 

§  24.     The  inspiration  of  the  historical  books. 

As  no  writer  can  be  entirely  free  from  error  or  the  danger  of 
erring,  divine  assistance  for  the  prevention  of  error  could  not  but  be 
useful  to  the  historical  writers  ;  but  whether  it  was  necessary  is  with 
many  a  matter  of  doubt  because  history  written  by  candid  and  well 
informed  men,  is  of  itself  possessed  of  sufficient  authority.  But 
inasmuch  as  in  the  Bible  the  religious  doctrine  is  in  a  great  measure 
founded  upon  the  history,  or  inseparably  connected  with  it  [a]  it  will 
readUy  be  seen  that  the  authority  of  the  history  affects  that  of  the 
doctrine  ;  and  that  the  doubts  which  must  necessarily  arise  respect- 
ing the  correctness  of  the  history,  were  it  merely  human,  would  by 
consequence  attach  to  the  doctrine  connected  with  it.  If,  for  in- 
stance, the  ancient  Hebrews  had  considered  the  history  of  the 
creation  as  merely  humaji,  and  consequently  had  presumed  to  en- 
tertain doubts  respecting  the  facts  related,  this  would  soon  have 
extended,  in  the  general  prevalence  of  idolatry,  to  errors  respect- 
ing the  Creator.  Any  hesitancy  as  to  the  truth  of  the  account  of 
the  Exode,  must  soon  have  rendered  suspicious  to  them  the  whole 
system  of  religion  dependent  on  it.  Moreover  the  peculiar  di- 
vine plan  which,  as  has  already  been  remarked,  extends  through- 
out the    whole    history   of   the    Hebrews,    should    rest   on    better 


40      GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO  THE    SACRED  BOOKfc 

authority  than  would  be  afforded  by  a  production  merely  human. 
These  reasons  however  prove  the  need  of  divine  authority  for 
those  portions  only  of  the  history  which  are  connected  with  some 
doctrine  or  with  events  constituting  essential  parts  of  the  divine 
plan  ;  so  that  the  opinion  of  Holden  stated  in  the  last  section,  might 
be  thought  correct  were  it  not  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  have 
attributed  divine  authority  to  the  books  in  question  without  making 
any  such  distinction.  It  might  indeed  be  replied  to  this  that  this 
distinction,  being  otherwise  well  known,  was  taken  for  granted  by 
them  ;  but  on  the  other  hand,  it  would  remain  to  be  seen  whether 
St.  Paul,,  in  Rom.  xv.  4,  does  not  assert  that  all  parts  of  these  books 
have  a  bearing  upon  religious  doctrines.  [6] 

Whatever  objections  against  the  inspiration  of  these  books  are  drawn 
from  the  difficulties  occurring  in  their  contents,  may  be  removed  by  this 
single  answer,  that  Jesus  and  his  apostles  were  not  ignorant  of  them,  and 
nevertheless  attributed  divine  authority  to  the  books :  they  must,  there- 
fore, be  removed  in  some  other  way.  [Explanations  of  these  difficulties 
are  never  wanting,  and  if  they  should  not  always  prove  entirely  satisfac- 
tory, yet  this  does  not  constitute  a  ground  of  objection  to  the  inspiration 
of  the  books,  but  must  not  unfrequently  be  placed  solely  to  the  account 
of  our  ignorance.  The  entire  removal  of  many  difficulties  which  formerly 
admitted  of  no  satisfactory  explanation,  in  consequence  of  the  progress  of 
oriental  learning  within  the  last  fifty  years,  is  sufficient  proof  of  this. 

With  respect  to  objections  drawn  from   the  disagreement  of  some 

expressions  in  the  Bible  with  the  established  philosophical  systems,  it  is 
enough  to  remark,  that  the  sacred  writers  wrote  conformably  to  their  own 
situation,  and  to  the  modes  of  speaking  then  generally  prevalent,  and 
that  it  was  neither  their  business  nor  their  intention  to  afford  instruction 
in  natural  philosophy.  1  he  question,  whether  all  the  sacred  writers  par- 
took of  an  equal  degree  of  inspiration,  which  has  been  much  discussed, 
admits  of  no  satisfactory  determination,  and  is  of  no  importance,  since  it 
is  certain  that  all  were  by  divine  superintendence  preserved  from  error, 
and  nothing  more  is  necessary  to  secure  for  them  ptrliect  confidence.] 

[a)  Compare  Mori  Dissertationes  Theologicae,  Vol.  II.  p.  1 — 106., 
de  Religionis  notitia  cum  rebus  experientiae  obviis  et  hi  facto  positis 
copulata.] 

[6)  On  the  nature  of  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  historians,  HoRgLET 
gives  the  following  opinion  :  "  God,  even  in  the  more  immediate  inter- 
positions of  his  providence,  acts  by  natural  means  and  second  causes,  so 
far  as  natural  means  and  second  causes  may  be  made  to  serve  the  pur- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  4l 

Jjose.  The  infiuence,  therefore,  of  the  inspiring  spirit  on  the  mind  of  an 
historian,  can  be  nothing  more  than  to  secure  him  from  mistake  and 
falsity,  by  strengthening  his  memory,  and  by  maintaining  in  his  heart  a 
religious  love  and  reverence  for  truth,  that  he  may  be  incapable  of 
omission  through  forgetfulness,  and  may  be  invincibly  fortified  against 
all  temptations  to  forge,  conceal,  disguise,  or  prevaricate.  That  inspira- 
tion ever  was  the  means  of  conveying  the  first  knowledge  of  facts  to  an 
historian's  mind  is  a  very  unreasonable  supposition.  It  is  to  suppose  an 
unnecessary  miracle.  For  a  miracle  is  always  unnecessary  where  natu- 
ral means  might  serve  the  purpose.  And  the  supposition  of  an  unneces- 
sary miracle  is  always  an  unreasonable,  and  indeed  a  dangerous  supposi- 
tion. Unreasonable,  because  no  evidence  can  prove  it,  and  no  plausible 
argument  can  be  alleged  for  it ;  dangerous,  because  it  leads  to  an  unli- 
mited and  pernicious  credulity."  Horsley's  Dissertation  on  the  Pro- 
phecies of  the  Messiah  dispersed  among  the  Heathen.  P.  78.  Am.  ed 
1815.     Tr.] 

i 

§  25.     The  use  of  Inspiration. 

If  revealed  truth  were  contained  in  writings  merely  human,  there 
would  be  continually  room  for  doubt  whether  the  writers  had  not 
erred  through  human  frailty  ;  and  this  would  open  the  way  for  infi- 
nite difficulties  and  disputes.  For  as  every  man  is  pre-occupied 
with  some  particular  opinions,  and  carried  away  by  some  ruling  pre- 
judice, each  one  would  easily  be  brought  to  suspect  the  writer  to  be 
in  error  whenever  his  own  favourite  opinions  and  prejudices  were 
opposed.  To  these  suspicions  his  prepossessions  would  add  such 
weight,  especially  if  any  particular  occasion  for  it  were  afforded,  that 
it  would  preponderate  over  the  authority  of  the  writer,  and  thus 
every  one  would  reject  that  doctrine  which  might  be  disagreeable  to 
him.  And  as  different  men  embrace  different  opinions  and  are 
swayed  by  different  prejudices,  and  each  would  question  or  reject 
those  parts  which  were  at  variance  with  his  own  opinions  and  preju- 
dices ;  the  consequence  would  be,  as  Augustin  has  observed,  that 
"  the  existence  of  falsehood  in  this  high  authority  being  once  allow- 
ed, no  particle  of  these  books  would  remain,  which  would  not  in 
some  way  or  other,  be  thought  in  relation  to  morals,  difficult,  or  in 
relation  to  faith,  incredible/'     Ep.  ad  Hieronymum. 

P. 


42         GENERAL  INTRODUCTION   TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKb 

§  26.     Canon  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  [a] 

The  inspiration  of  the  sacred  books  being  estabhshed,  the  question 
arises,  which  are  these  inspired  books  ?  The  Catalogue  of  the  books 
which  are  inspired,  is  called  The  Canon,  from  the  Greek  word  xwuv 
which  signifies  not  only  a  rule  but  also  a  list  or  record  of  certain 
things  or  persons  :  this  name  has  been  appropriated  to  the  catalogue 
of  the  divine  writings  since  the  fourth  century.  See  Suiceki  Thesaur. 
Eccles.  in  verb.  Tom.  II.  p.  40.  But  as  there  are  books  found  in 
the  Alexandrine  and  Latin  versions,  which  are  not  in  the  Hebrew 
copies,  and  were  on  that  account,  and  on  account  of  the  difficulties 
■which  they  contain,  very  early  called  in  question  by  many,  a  double 
canon  has  been  formed,  a  first  and  a  second  :  so  that  those  books 
the  divine  authority  of  which  has  been  always  and  every  where  ac- 
knowledged by  the  church,  are  called  protocanonical,  but  the  rest,  the 
divine  authority  of  which  was  questioned  by  many  in  the  primitive 
church,  and  which  were  by  some  entirely  excluded  from  the  canon, 
deuterocanonical.  Those  books  which  by  reason  either  of  their  title,  or 
of  the  author's  name  affixed  to  them,  or  of  their  contents,  might  easily  be 
thought  inspired,  and  yet  are  not  so,  are  called  apocr\'phal,  [from 
o.7iox^v^ov,  hidden]  which  name  also  has  been  used  in  this  peculia? 
acceptation  since  the  fourth  century. 

[a)  It  will  be  perceived  that  in  this  and  the  following  sections  some  Oj' 
the  peculiar  views  of  the  church  to  which  Jahn  belonged  are  advanced. 
The  author,  however,  was  one  of  those  Romanists  who  are  willing  to  ren- 
der the  tenets  of  their  church  as  much  as  possible  consistent  with  truth 
and  reason .  Accordingly,  if  some  terms  be*excepted,  and  som  earguments  of 
little  strength,  not  much  will  be  found  that  might  not  be  consistently 
maintained  by  Protestants.  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  five  following 
sections,  see  Eichh.  ^  15 — 57.  or  his  Repertorium  fiir  Bibl.  und  Mor- 
gand.  Lit.  Th.  V.  S.  217—282.  where  the  whole  subject  of  the  canon  is 
ably  investigated.     TV.] 

§  27.      The  manner  in  which  the  canon  is  to  be  ascertained. 

The  divine  authority  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  rests  up 
on  the  testimony  of  Jesus  and  his  Apostles ;  for  which  reason  such 
authority  is  to  be  attributed  to  those  books  only  for  which  sucli 
testimony  can  be  adduced.     But  as  neither  .Tesus  nor  his  Apostle? 


OV     IHE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  43 

anywhere  enumerate  these  books,  and  nothing  certain  on  the  subject 
can  be  collected  from  their  citations  ;  we  must  have  recourse  to  the 
opinion  of  the  Jews  of  that  age,  and  conclude  those  books  to  have 
been  approved  of  by  Jesus  and  his  Apostles,  to  which  the  Jews  of 
that  age  attributed  divine  authority.  This  course  is  so  much  the 
more  safe,  as  we  are  certain  that  Jesus  and  his  Apostles  never  up- 
braided the  Jews  with  the  admission  of  any  apocryphal  books. But 

neither  Josephus  nor  Philo,  who  are  the  only  Jewish  writers  of  that 
period,  have  framed  a  catalogue  of  their  sacred  books,  nor  can  any 
thing  certain  be  inferred  from  their  quotations. [a]  We  must,  there- 
fore, adopt  some  other  method  of  ascertaining  the  Jewish  canon  in  the 
age  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles. 

[a)  This  assertion  should  be  limited.  In  the  German,  Jahn  says,  '  We 
lind  one  passage  in  Josephus  which  affords  some  light  on  the  subject, 
which  will  be  presently  discussed.'  This  is  Cent.  Apion.  Lib.  I.  c.  8. 
See  {  28.  vers.  fin.     TV.] 

§  28.     The  First  Canon. 

Since  therefore  no  writer  of  that  time  has  enumerated  the  sacred 
books,  we  must  inquire  into  the  opinions  of  the  Jews  of  those  ages 
which  were  nearest  to  it.  These  unanimously  testify  that  all  the  books 
which  we  have  at  present  in  Hebrew,  are  canonical.  These  testimo- 
nies shall  now  be  recited  in  retrograde  order. 1)  In  the  Talmud, 

which  was  commenced  at  the  end  of  the  2nd  century,  and  completed 
towards  the  close  of  the  5th,  all  these  books  are  placed,  without  any 

hesitation,  in  the  canon  of  the  Jews. 2)  Testimony  to  the  same 

effect  is  given  by  Jerome,  at  the  end  of  the  4th  century,  in  his  Prolog. 
Galeat.  Ep.  ad  Paulinum,  and  also  by  the  fact  that  he  translated 

them,  as  such,  from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin. 3)  Epiphanius,  in 

the  4th  century,  adduces  the  same  canon,  as  that  of  the  Nazarenes. 
who  were  Hebrew   Christians.     Haeres.  xxix.  Opp.  Tom.  I.  p.  122. 

ss. 4)  Origen  testifies  that  this  was  the  canon  of  the  Jews,  Exp. 

in  Ps.  I.  Opp.  Tom.  H.  p.  529,  and  in  Eusebius  Hist.  Ecc. 
L.  VI.  c.  25.  In  the  latter  place  the  omission  of  the  12  prophets  is 
merely  an  error  of  the  transcriber  :  for  Origen  'not  only  frequently 
cites  those  books,  but  also  copied  them  entire  into'his  Hexapla  from 
the  canon  of  the  Jews. — —5)  Melitoof  Sardis,  who  had  learned  the  ca- 


44    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

non  of  the  Jews  while  in  the  east,  about  A.  D.  172,  gives  to  Onesimus  a 
list  (which  Eusebius  has  preserved,)  of  the  same  books  as  canonical, 
with  the  exception  of  the  book  of  Esther.  This  book  is  also  passed  over 
in  silence,  or  in  express  words  excluded  from  the  canon,  by  several 
other  fathers. [a]  This  circumstance  has  given  occasion  to  soifie 
difference  of  opinion  among  the  learned  :  whether  the  omission  in 
Mehto's  catalogue  arose  from  the  negligence  of  some  transcriber  over- 
looking EaOtjp  after  EaSpaj,  or  whether  Esther  and  Nehemiah  were  both 
included  under  the  name  of  Ezra,  or  the  book  were  designedly  pass- 
ed over. 6)  Aquila,  Symmachus,  Theodotion,  the  authors  of  the 

Peshito  or  ancient  Syriac  version,  and  the  Alexandrine  interpreters, 
translated  all  these  books  as  belonging  to  the  Jewish  canon.  Aquila 
and  the  Alexandrine  interpreters  are  witnesses  of  great  importance. 

From  the  time  of  Aquila  to  that  of  the  last  of  the  Apostles  not 

more  than  20  or  30  years  had  intervened  ;  from  that  of  Melito  80  or 
100  ;  from  that  of  Origen  110  or  130.  In  this  space  of  time  the 
Jews  could  not  have  changed  their  canon  without  the  knowledge  of 
Melito,  and  especially  of  Origen,  who  was  an  acute  inquirer  and 
had  travelled  through  many  parts  of  the  world.  Besides,  the  Jews 
of  this  period  were  so  attached  to  their  sacred  books,  that  they  would 
have  abhorred  all  idea  of  change.  Comp.  Josephus  Contr.  Apion. 
L.  I.  c.  viii.  Hence  we  may  safely  conclude,  that  the  Jews  in  the 
time  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles  had  no  other  canon  than  the  present, 
and  consequently  that  this  was  approved  by  Jesus  and  his  Apostles.  [6] 
These  books  if  all,  as  well  those  of  Moses  as  the  rest,  are  counted 
singly,  amount  in  number  to  39.  Yet  Josephus,  who  (Cont.  Apion. 
L.  I,  c.  viii.)  divides  them  into  three  classes,  numbers  only  22,  namely, 
the  5  books  of  Moses,  1 3  prophets,  and  4  other  books.  To  account  for 
this.  It  must  be  observed,  that  the  Jews  accommodated  the  number  of 
their  sacred  books,  as  the  Greeks  did  that  of  the  parts  of  the  Iliad  and 
Odyssey,  to  the  number  of  their  letters,  and  hence,  as  Origen  and 
Jerome  testify,  frequently  counted  two  or  more  books  as  one,  as  for 
instance  the  books  of  Judges  and  Ruth,  the  two  books  of  Samuel,  the 
two  books  of  Kings,  the  two  books  of  Chronicles,  Jeremiah  and  La- 
mentations, Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  the  12  minor  prophets.  Ac- 
cording to  this  method  of  computation,  used  by  the  Jews,  Josephus 
reckoned  the  sacred  books  in  the  following  order  :  The  ftvk  books 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  45 

I 

OF  Moses  :  1.  Genesis,  2.  Exodus,  3.  Leviticus,  4.  Numbers,  5.  Deut- 
eronomy. The  thirteen  Prophets  :  1.  Joshua,  2.  the  books  of 
Judges  and  Ruth,  3.  the  books  of  Samuel,  4.  the  books  of  Kings, 
5.  the  books  of  Chronicles,  6.  Ezraand  Nehemiah,  7.  Esther,  8.  Isaiah, 
9.  Jeremiah  and  Lamentations,  10.  Ezekiel,  1 1.  Daniel,  12.  The^ttWve 
minor  prophets,  13.  Joi:  The  four  other  books;  I.  Psalms 
2.  Proverbs,  3.  Ecclesiastes,  4.  Can<icfc*.[c]  Jerome,  (in  Prolog. 
Galeat.)  reduces  the  books  to  the  same  number,  but  remarks  that 
some  of  the  Jews  separated  Ruth  from.  Judges,  and  Lamentations 
from  JererfnaTi,  thus  making  the  number  of  books  24,  plainly  with  re- 
ference to  the  number  of  letters  in  the  Greek  alphabet.  With  these 
the  authors  of  the  Talmud  agree  ;  and  this  had  led  some  Jews,  from 
the  manner  of  writing  the  word  mri"'  in  an  abridged  form  thus,  %',  to 

force  out  the  inference  that  in  Hebrew  there  are  three  Yods,  in  order 
that  the  number  of  the  Hebrew  letters  might  equal  that  of  the  Greek. 

[The  Jews  attribute  the  establishment  of  the  Canon  to  what  they  call 
the  Great  Synagogue,  which  during  more  than  two  hundred  years,  from 
Zerubbabel  down  to  Simon  the  Just,  was  composed  of  the  prophets  and 
the  most  eminent  men  of  the  nation.  But  the  whole  story  respecting  this 
Synagogue,  which  first  occurs  in  the  Talmud,  (Aurivii.lii  Dissert,  p.  139 
— 160,  do  Synagoga  vulgo  magna  dicta,)  is  utterly  unworthy  of  credit. 
It  is  evidently  a  fictitious  representation  of  the  historic  truth,  that  the 
men  who  are  said  to  have  constituted  the  Synagogue,  were  chiefly  in- 
strumental in  the  new  regulation  of  the  state,  and  in  the  constitution  of 
the  Jewish  church,  and  consequently  in  the  collecting  and  fixing  the  holy 
books  upon  which  this  constitution  was  established  It  is  in  itself  very 
probable,  that  the  Jews  on  their  return  from  exile  should  think  it  incum- 
bent on  them  to  show  their  respect  for  their  sacred  books,  the  promises 
of  which  had  just  been  fulfilled,  and  on  the  future  promises  of  whirh  all 
their  hopes  were  founded,  by  forming  collections  of  them.  It  is  also  pro- 
bable that  the  prophets  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  and  other  learned  and 
eminent  men,  especially  Ezra,  endeavoured  to  render  such  a  collection  as 
complete  as  possible,  and  that  the  interest  taken  by  the  prophets  in  the 
formation  of  the  collection  gave  it  the  stamp  of  divine  authority.  With- 
out doubt  correct  copies  of  this  collection  were  laid  up  in  the  temple,  as 
Moses  had  already  placed  his  laws  in  the  sanctuary,  and  afterwards  the 
agreement  with  Saul  at  his  election  to  the  kingdom  had  been  preserved 
in  the  same  manner.  The  prophet  Malachi,  and  the  pious  governor  Ne- 
hemiah. the  latter  of  whom  according  to  II.  Mac.  ii.  13,  formed,  or  rather 


46    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

completed,  the  sacred  collection,  incorporated  into  it  the  later  works  and 
their  own  writings,  and  as  no  prophet  subsequently  arose,  the  collection 
was,  properly  speaking,  finished.  The  Jews,  however,  fix  the  date  of  its 
final  completion  under  Simon  the  Just,  whom  they  place  in  the  early 
part  of  the  third  century  before  Christ  This  much  is  certain,  that  there 
is  no  sign  of  any  later  establishment  of  the  Canon.  The  genealogy  of 
David's  posterity,  I.  Chron.  iii.  17 — 24,  which  was  probably  completed 
by  Simon  the  Just,  reaches  down  to  the  end  of  the  "fourth  century  before 
Christ.  In  the  third  century  before  Christ  the  books  were  gradually 
translated  into  Greek.  Shortly  after  this  the  collection  seems  to  have 
been  completed  a  considerable  time,  since  it  is  not  only  mentioned  as  ge- 
nerally known  and  divided  into  three  parts,  by  the  translator  of  the  Wis- 
dom of  the  Son  of  Sirach,  in  the  year  131  before  Christ,  but  is  also  re- 
presented as  old  by  the  Son  of  Sirach  himself,  c.  xhx.,  between  130  and 
180  before  Christ.  Besides,  it  is  not  evident  why  the  elegant  and  useful 
moral  treatise  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach  should  not  have  been  received 
among  the  holy  books,  if  the  number  of  those  books  had  not  been 
already  long  determined.] 

[o)  See  Part  II   ^  70.     TV.] 

[6)  The  testimony  of  the  Christian  church  to  the  Canon  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  given  by  Origen  Cont.  Cels.  III.  45.  Opp.  Tom.  I.  p.  476. 
and  in  Eusebius.  Ecc.  Hist.  VI.  25.  by  the  Council  of  Laodicea  (A.  D. 
360—364)  Mansi  Concil.  Tom.  II.  p.  574.  &c.  &c.  See  these  and  other 
testimonies  in  full  in  De  Wette  Einleitung  ins  Alt.  Test-  {  25,  26, 27.  S. 
41—53.     Tr.] 

[c)  See  Eichhorn's  Repert.  fiir  Bibl.  und  Morgenl.  Lit.  V.  Th. 
3.  260—271.     Tr.] 

§  29.     Of  the  Second  Canon. 

The  books  mentioned  in  the  preceding  section  were  undoubtedly 
included  in  the  canon  of  the  Jews  in  the  age  of  Christ,  and  approved 
by  him,  and  dehvered  by  his  apostles  to  the  churches  which  they  es- 
tablished. Whether  in  the  Alexandrine  version  which  the  apostles 
recommended  to  the  churches,  there  were  not  also  other  books 
equally  recommended  by  them  as  of  divine  authority,  is  a  difficult 
question,  which  was  debated  even  in  the  ancient  church.  For  this 
reason  we  place  such  books  in  the  Second  Canon.  They  are  as  fol- 
lows:  1.  Baruch;  2.  The  Wisdom  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  or 
Ecclesia^ticus ;  3.  The  Wisdom  of  Solomon;  4.  The  book  of  Tobit ; 
h.  Judith;  6.  The  first  and  second  books  of  Maccabees :  7.  The  addi- 


I 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  47 

fions  to  the  book  of  Esther,  from  c.  x.  4,  to  c.  xvi.  24  ;*  8.  The  Song 
of  the  three  Children,  Dan.  iii.  24 — 90  ;t  9.  The  History  of  Susannah, 

Dan.  xiii.  ;t   10.  The  History  of  Bel  and  the  dragon,  Dan.  xiv.t 

The  arguments  by  which  some  have  attempted  to  show  that  the  Hel- 
lenistic Jews  attribute  to  these  books  a  divine  authority,  are  of  no 
force.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  I.  §.  29.  pp.  133.  ss.[a]  Of  greater 
weight  is  1)  the  testimony  of  Jerome,  who  (Praef.  in  Tobit.  et  Ju- 
dith.) declares,  that  the  Hebrews  read  them  among  the  hagiographa, 
i.  e.  among  the  sacred  writings  :  to  the  same  purpose  2)  Origen  (Ep. 
ad  Afric.)  attests,  that  the  Jews  placed  the  book  of  Tobit  neither  in 
the  canon,  nor  yet  among  the  Apocrypha.  So  also  3)  Junilius  (De 
Partit.  Divin.  Leg.  c.  3.)  says,  that  these  books  were  received  by  the 
Jews  with  some  doubt  :  4)  the  Apostolical  Constitutions  allege  that 
the  Jews  read  the  book  of  Baruch  in  their  synagogues  on  the  day  of 
expiation :  5)  the  Talmudists,  and  long  before  them  the  writers  of 
the  New  Testament  used  them,  although  they  never  cite  them  by 
name  :  6)  Josephus  (Cont.  Ap.  L.  I.  §  8.)  says,  that  these  books 
were  not  thought  worthy  of  as  much  credit  as  the  others,  because 
the  succession  of  prophets,  or  of  inspired  writers,  could  not  be  traced 
with  certainty  as  low  as  the  time  of  their  composition.  7)  Lastly,  all 
things  considered,  it  seems  probable  that  these  books  were  recom- 
mended to  the  churches  by  the  Apostles  together  with  the  others  as 
they  were  found  in  the  Alexandrine  version  ;  for  unless  that  had 
been  the  case,  it  would  be  difficult  to  conceive  how  so  many  Chris- 
tian churches  could  have  received  them  from  the  Jews  without  suspi- 
cion. Nevertheless,  Athanasius,  Gregory  Nazianzen,  Epiphanius,  the 
anonymous  framer  of  the  59th  canon  of  the  Council  of  Laodicea, 
Hilary,  Ruffin,  and  Jerome,  exclude  these  books  from  the  canon. 
But  when  some  persons  carrying  their  opposition  to  a  greater  length, 
disapproved  of  their  being  read  in  churches,  the  Council  of  Hippo 
in  393,  (AuGusTiN.  de  Doct.  Christ.  L.  H.  c.  8.)  and  the  Councils  of 
Carthage  in  397  and  419,  received  these  books  into  the  canon,  with 
the  proviso,  that  the  transmarine  churches   should  be  consulted  ; 

*  [Forming  in  the  English  translation  a  separate  book  in  the  Apocrypha,  under  the 
title  of  "  The  rest  of  the  book  of  Esther,  which  is  found  neither  in  the  Hebrew  nor 
in  the  Chaldee."     Tr.] 

t  [Forming  in  the  English  translation  a  separate  book  in  the  Apocrypha.     Tr.] 


48    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

which  seems  to  have  been  done,  for  Innocent  I.  (Ep.  ad.  Exsupe 
rium,)  declares  these  books  canonical,  in  which  he  is  followed  by  the 
synod  held  at  Rome  in  494,  if  indeed  the  acts  purporting  to  be  those 
of  that  synod  are  genuine. 

These  decrees  however  are  not  of  general  obligation,  nor  are  the} 
to  be  understood  otherwise  than  as  declaring  the  reading  of  these 
books  in  the  churches  to  be  useful  for  the  edification  of  the  people, 
not  as  asserting  their  sufficiency  to  prove  theological  doctrines.  This 
is  attested  in  express  terms,  not  only  by  Jerome  (Praef.  in  libros  Sa- 
lomonis,  Praef  in  Judith,  and  Praef.  in  Tob.)  but  also  by  Ritfin,  (in 
Symbol.)  and  by  Gregory  I.  (Coram,  in  Job.)  Comp.  Du  Pin  Pro- 
leg,  sur  la  Bible,  L.  I.  c.  i.  §  4.  p.  8.  [Du  Pin  on  the  Canon,  p.  7.  s.] 

[a)  The  author,  after  having  stated  these  arguments  in  this  work,  re- 
marks, that  they  prove  no  more  than  that  the  Hellenistic  Jews  might 
have  had  those  books  in  their  canon,  not  that  they  had  actually  introdu- 
ced them.     TV.] 

§  30.     Canon  of  the  Council  of  Trent. 

■  The  Protestants  desiring  to  have  these  books  expelled  from  the 
churches,  the  Council  of  Trent  took  up  the  subject  in  its  delibera- 
tions on  the  formation  of  a  Canon.  According  to  the  relations  of 
Father  Paul,  (Hist.  del.  Cone.  Trid.  L.  II.  p.  157,  159,)*  and  Pala- 
vicini,  (Hist.  Cone.  Trid.  L.  VI.)  there  were  sharp  disputes  upon  the 
subject ;  not  a  few  contending  that  these  books  ought  to  be  distin- 
guished from  the  rest,  and  thrown  into  a  separate  secondary  canon : 
others  however,  opposing  this  proposition,  on  the  ground  that  there 
was  no  precedent  of  an  establishment  of  a  double  canon  by  any 
council,  and  that  the  difference  of  the  hooks  was  already  sufficiently 
Imown  to  the  learned;  at  length  all  present,  namely,  48  bishops  and 
5  cardinals,  agreed  that  all  the  books  should  be  placed  in  one  collec- 
tion. This  decision  is  contained  in  the  proceedings  of  the  4th  ses- 
sion, wherein  all  are  anathematized  who  do  not  receive  all  these  books 
entire  with  all  their  parts,  as  they  have  been  accustomed  to  be  read  in 
the  Catholic  church,  and  as  they  are  contained  in  the  old  Vulgate  Latin 
edition,  for  sabred  and  canonical,  or  who  knowingly  and  deliberately 

*  [Hist,  du  CoBC.  dc  Trente,  tr.  Le  Couratbr,   Tom,  I.  p.  276.  s.      BrentV 
Council  of  Trent,  p.  152.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  19 

contemn  the  aforesaid  traditions. The  distinction  between  these 

books,  therefore,  is  by  no  means  removed,  and  on  this  account  Lamy 
(Appar.  Bibl.  L.  II.  c.  v.)  denies  that  the  deuterocanonical  books 
have  the  same  authority  with  those  of  the  first  canon,  (Comp.  above 
§  29.)  while  on  the  other  hand  Du  Pin  affirms  it ;  Diss.  PreUm.  sui- 
la  Bibl.  L.  I.  c.  i.  §  6.  [On  the  Canon,  p.   15.  s.] 

§  31.     Apocryphal  Books. 

There  were  formerly  many  apocryphal  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  circulation,  but  most  of  them  have  perished.  Those  that 
have  withstood  the  injuries  of  time  are, — the  Fourth  Book  of  Ezra, 
the  Prayer  of  Manasseh,  and  the  Third  Book  of  Maccabees.  All  of 
these  are  preserved  in  the  Alexandrine  version,  and  the  first  two  in 
the  Latin  Vulgate.  From  the  rejection  of  these  books  it  is  evident, 
that  the  ancient  Jews  and  Christians  did  not  receive  books  as  sacred 
without  discrimination,  but  examined  carefully  whether  their  inspira- 
tion could  be  satisfactorily  proved.  Although  some  ecclesiastical 
writers  have  made  use  of  the  apocryphal  books,  yet  the  church 
has  never  acceded  to  their  judgment,  but  has  uniformly  rejected 
such  books. 


50       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    SACRED  BOOKh 


CHAPTER  111. 


WISTORY    OK   THE   VERSIONS   OF   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT. 


§  32.    Division  of  the  history  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament. 

Aftek  having  shown  that  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  are 
genuine  and  incorrupt,  worthy  of  credit,  and  of  divine  authority,  and 
given  a  catalogue  of  them,  it  remains  to  examine  their  external  and 
internal  history  during  the  course  of  so  many  centuries.  To  their 
external  history  we  refer  an  account  of  the  different  versions :  to 
the  internal,  accounts  of  their  language,  of  the  changes  of  the  writ- 
ten characters,  and  of  their  various  readings.  These  preparatory 
researches  will  be  divided  as  follows  :  this  third  chapter  will  be  oc- 
cupied by  the  versions  ;  the  fourth  by  the  language  and  the  means  of 
acquiring  a  knowledge  of  it  ;  the  fifth  by  the  characters  ;  the  sixth 
by  the  various  readings  ;  and  lastly,  the  seventh  will  treat  of  the  art 
of  criticism  by  which  the  true  readings  are  to  be  discovered. 

§  33.    Subjects  worthy  of  notice  respecting  the  ancient  versions. 

The  ancients  are  indeed  valuable  witnesses  as  well  in  interpreta- 
tion as  in  criticism,  but  their  respective  authority  is  by  no  means 
equal.  This  depends  partly  upon  the  age,  the  country,  and  the  au- 
thor of  each  version  ;  partly  upon  the  text  from  which  it  has  been 
taken  ;  and  partly  upon  its  conformation,  nature,  and  character.  For 
this  reason,  before  we  can  have  a  correct  idea  of  the  value  of  any 
particular  version,  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  be  particularly  ac- 
quainted with  1)  its  age,  and  if  possible  its  author,  and  the  place 
where  it  was  composed ;  2)  the  text  from  which  it  was  made  ;  and 
3)  the  method  pursued  in  making  the  translation,  and  the  state  in 
which  it  now  exists  after  having  undergone  the  vicissitudes  attending 


OF    THE    0LD    TESTAMENT.  ;ji| 

the  lapse  of  ages. We  shall  pay  attention  to  all  these  paiticulars 

in  treating  briefly  of  all  the  ancient  versions,  especially  with  respect 
to  the  Alexandrine  version  on  account  of  its  being  the  most  ancient, 
and  to  the  Vulgate  Latin  on  account  of  its  being  the  adopted  text  of 
the  church  of  Rome. 

§  34.     Origin  of  the  Alexandrine  Version.[a] 

Aristaeas,  an  author  who  pretends  to  be  a  Gentile,  prsefect  of  the 
body  guards  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  relates  in  a  letter  addressed  to  his 
brother  Philocrates,  that  Ptolemy  Philadelphus,  at  the  instance  of 
Demetrius  Phalereus  the  keeper  of  his  library,  obtained  from  Elea- 
zar  the  high  priest  of  the  Jews,  by  means  of  magnificent  presents, 
seventy-two  interpreters,  who  in  the  palace  of  the  isle  of  Pharos, 
after  mutual  conferences  and  consultations,  translated  the  books  of 
Moses  from  the  Hebrew  into  Greek,  whence  their  version  was  called, 
in  round  numbers,  the  version  of  the  Seventy  interpreters.  This  ac- 
count, repugnant  as  it  is  to  historical  truth,  and  contradictory  in  itself, 
has  been  copied  from  Aristaeas  by  JosErnus,  Ant.  Jud.  XII.  ii.  1 — 15, 
and  by  Eusebius,  Prsef.  Evang.  VIII.  ii — v.  p.  350 — 365.  By  the  oral 
traditions,  on  which  Philo,  Justin,  and  Epiphanius  have  relied,  it  was 
exaggerated  to  such  an  extent,  that  the  interpreters  were  transformed 
into  inspired  writers.  [&]      Upon  comparison  with  the  history  of  those 

times,  the  following  appears  to  be  all  that  is  true  in  the  narration. 

The  Jews,  who  were  carried  by  Ptolemy  Lagus  into  Egypt  320  years 
before  Christ,  together  with  those  who  voluntarily  accompanied  them 
thither,  having  become  accustomed  to  the  use  of  the  Greek  language, 
a  Greek  version  of  the  sacred  books,  and  especially  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, became  necessary,  and  seems  to  have  been  accomplished  by 
some  translator  attached  to  a  synagogue.  Plutarch  informs  us,  Reg^ 
et  Imperat.  Apothegm,  p.  124.  Opp.  Vol.  VIII.  ed.  Hutten,  that  De- 
metrius Phalereus  advised  Ptolemy  Lagus  (in  whose  reign  IrensBus 
and  Clement  of  Alexandria  say  the  version  was  made,)  to  read 
authors  on  political  subjects,  because  they,  although  dead,  utter 
truths  to  kings  which  living  men  are  afraid  to  speak.  Hence,  per- 
haps, it  happened  that  Ptolemy  requested  of  the  Synagogue  a  copy 
of  their  Greek  translation  of  the  Laws  of  Moses,  and  placed  it  in  his 
!  library.     This  version  of  the  Pentateuch  must  therefore  have  been 


52        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKb 

made  in  the  interval  of  time  which  elapsed  between  the  year  298 
B.  C,  in  which  Demetrius  Phalereus  fled  to  Ptolemy  Lagus,  and  the 
year  285  B.  C,  in  which  Ptolemy  Lagus  ceased  to  reign.  The  con- 
nexion of  the  number  70  with  the  name  of  the  version,  may  have 
originated   in  its  being  revised  and  approved   by  a  council  of  70 

learned  men. The  other  books  were  subsequently  translated  by 

different  Jewish  writers,  as  plainly  appears  fiom  the  variations  in  the 
orthography  of  proper  names,[c]  from  the  difference  in  the  mode  of 
translating,  and  from  the  degree  of  learning  manifested  by  the  trans- 
lators, which  varies  in  almost  every  book.  That  they  were  Egyptian 
Jews  is  shown  by  the  occurrence  of  several  Egyptian  words,  [d]  In 
fine,  that  all  the  books  were  translated  in  the  third  century  before 
Christ, [e]  is  intimated  by  the  translator  of  Ecclesiasticus,  who  in  the 
close  of  the  third,  or  at  latest  in  the  second  century  before  Christ,  in 
his  preface  assumes  as  a  well  known  fact,  that  all  the  Hebrew  books 
had,  during  some  time,  been  translated  into  Greek. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  ten  follov^ing  sections,  compart 
Horne's  Introduction,  Vol.  II.  p.  163 — 182;  Carpzov,  Critica  Sacra, 
P.  II.  c.  ii.  iii.  p.  481— 585;  Eichhorn,  J  161— 212  ;  S.  Gi.assii  Philo- 
logia  Sacra,  ed.  Bauer,  Tom.  II.  p.  239—288,  ^  40—58;  Simon,  Hist, 
Crit.  du  V.  T.  L.  II.  c  ii — x.,  and  Prideaux's  Connexions,  Part  II. 
Book  I.  Anno  277,  ed.  Lond.  1720,  8vo.  Vol.  II.  p.  27—61.     TV.] 

[6)  The  genuineness  of  Aristseas  has  been  much  contested ;  See  Ro- 
SENM.  Handbuch  fiii  die  Lit.  der  Bib.  Krit.  und  Exeg.  II.  B.  S.  387 — 427. 
Lewis  Vives  in  his  remarks  on  Augustin,  de  Civ.  Dei.  xviii.  42,  consi- 
ders the  letter  as  supposititious,  and  the  account  as  fabulous.  He  was 
followed  by  Leo  a  Castro,  (Proem,  in  Jesai.)  Salmero,  (Prolegom  6.) 
Jos  Just.  Scaliger,  (ad  Chron.  Euseb.  Anno  mdccxxxiv.  p.  132 — 
134.)  and  Humphrey  Hodt  in  his  Dissertatio  contra  historiam  Aristese 
de  70  interpretibus,  1685,  8vo.  London,  where  he  professedly  discusses 
the  subject,  and  more  fully  in  his  work  de  Bibliorum  textibus  originali- 
bus,  versionibus  Graecis,  et  Latina  Vulgata,  1705,  fol.  Oxon.] 

[c)  In  the  book  of  Chronicles  HDS  is  written  (patfsx,  but  in  the  other 

books  Tladya. ;  in  the  Chronicles  also  we  find  0£xwi,  Ava^w5»,  Nstw- 
^arj,  when  in  the  books  of  Samuel  we  read   ©sxcjittj^,  AvaSwSiri^g, 

\i)  HoDY,  de  Bib.  Text.  p.  1—100, 115, 159, 570,  has  collected  them, 
they  are  such  as  oiflJi  or  oia)£i.  Num.  xxviii,  5.  Ruth  ii.  17.  which  He- 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  53 

sychius  says,  was  an  Egyptian  name  for  a  measure,  as  was  also  the  term 
a^TOL^ot,,  Isa.  V.  10,  according;  to  Jerome  ;  aX'  o'  '^X^''  ^ren.  xli.  2.  Isa. 
xix.  7;  *P£(pav  or  'PS|X(pav  or  'Pai^av,  Amos  v.  26,  which  in  the  old 
Egyptian,  and  present  Coptic,  is  the  word  for  Saturn  ,  and  aXrj&Sia  for 
the  image  of  truth  and  righteousness  worn  by  the  Egyptian  chief  justice, 
and  used  for  the  Urim  and  TKummira,  Ex.  xxviii.  30.] 

[e)  No  trace  of  a  more  modern  age  exists.  The  occurrence  of  the  word 
yaitfos,  javelin,  in  Jos.  viii.  18,  is  no  proof,  for  although  it  is  a  Gallic 
word,  yet  there  were  Gauls  in  Egypt  in  this  century,  and  as  early  as  the 
year  265  B.  C,  4000  of  them  made  an  i  snrrection  against  Ptolemy  Phi- 
ladelphus.     See  Pausanias  in  Atticis,  Lib.  I.  c.  viii.  1—3  ] 

§  35.     The  Pentateuch  was  translated  from  a  Jewish  text. 

Philo  indeed  tells  us  that  the  Pentateuch  was  translated  from  the 
Chaldee ;  but  what  he  calls  Chaldee,  was  the  Hebrew  idiom,  which 
is  termed  by  him  sometimes  Hebrew,  and  sometimes  Chaldee,  as  on 
the  other  hand  Chaldee  is  called  Hebrew  in  Ac.  xxi.  40.  xxii.  2. 
xxvi.  14.  Hassencamp,  who  asserted,  Comment.  Phil.  Crit.  1765. 
Marpurg,  that  the  Pentateuch  was  translated  from  the  Samaritan 
text,  has  not  been  able  to  prove  his  assertion  ;  nor  did  that  learned 
man  reflect  that  a  Pentateuch  translated  fiom  the  Samaiitan  would 
never  have  attained  that  credit  among  the  Jews,  which  we  every 
where  find  attached  to  this  version.  The  numerous  instances  of 
agreement  between  the  Alexandrine  and  Samaritan  readings  against 
the  Jewish,  only  prove  that  the  latter  text  formerly  agreed  more 
closely  with  the  Samaritan  than  at  present ;  and  there  are  abundant 
instances  of  a  difference  of  reading.  If  in  the  Alexandrine  version 
such  errors  occur  as  may  be  supposed  to  arise  from  the  inter- 
change of  similar  letters  in  the  Samaritan  alphabet,  it  still  remains  to 
be  proved  that  those  letters  were  then  dissimilar  in  the  Jewish  alpha- 
bet ;  and  on  the  other  hand  more  errors  exist  which  have  arisen 
from  the  interchange  of  similar  letters  in  the  Jewish  alphabet. 

§  36.     Character  of  the  Alexandrine  version. 

The  character  of  the  translation  differs  in  different  books.  In  all, 
however,  the  Greek  is  full  of  Hebraisms,  and  various  errors  occur, 
arising  partly  from  an  imperfect  acquaintance  with  grammar,  partly 
from  ianorance  of  the  art  of  interpretation,  and  partly  from  a  defect 


54   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

of  erudition  ;  nevertheless  very  many  parts  are  excellently  transla- 
ted. 

The  first  place  in  the  scale  of  merit  is  due  to  the  version  of  the 
Pentateuch,  which  far  surpasses  the  versions  of  the  other  books, 
Comp.  Gen.  xviii.  5,  xliii.  17.  xhv.  21.  xlv.  16.  xlix.  10.  Deut.  xxviii. 

57. The  next  to  this  is  the  translation  of  the  book  of  Proverbs, 

the  very  errors  of  which  exhibit  genius. The  books  of  Judges, 

Ruth,  Samuel,  and  Kings  seem  to  have  been  translated  by  one  man, 
who  does  not  admit  more  Hebraisms  than  the  other  translators,  but 

has  several  other  peculiarities. The  Psalms  and  Prophets  have 

been  translated  by  men  who  were  unequal  to  their  task.  The  ver- 
sion of  Jeremiah  is  better  than  the  rest ;  those  of  Amos  and  Ezekiel 
deserve  the  next  place,  and  the  last  must  be  given  to  that  of  Isaiah. 
The  translation  of  Daniel  which  every  where  differed  from  the  He- 
brew, has  been  long  ago  changed  by  the  church  for  the  version  of 
the  same  book  by  Theodotion. The  version  of  Ecclesiastes  is  re- 
markable for  its  being  closely  hteral. Tn  the  version  of  Job,  addi- 
tions have  been  made  to  those  parts  of  the  book  which  are  in  prose, 
while  the  poetical  parts  are  deficient  in  many  places  ;  for,  as  Jerome 
(Praef  in  Jobum)  has  observed,  seven  or  eight  hundred  verses  (or 
members  of  sentences)  have  been  omitted. 

§  37.     Authority  of  the  Alexandrine  version. 

This  version  was  used  by  all  the  Jews  who  understood  the  Greek 
language,  as  well  the  Hebrew  as  the  Hellenistic,  as  appears  from  Jo- 
sephus  and  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  who  almost  always 
follow  it.  Even  the  authors  of  the  Talmud  (Tract.  Megilloth)  make 
honourable  mention  of  its  origin,  and  (Tract.  Sota.  c.  7.)  speak  of  the 
Hellenistic  Synagogue  at  Cesarsea  in  which  this  version  was  read. 
Others,  however,  differed  so  far  from  them  as  (Tract.  Thaanet  aud 
Sopherim)  to  abominate  this  version,  and,  as  we  learn  from  Justinian's 
Novells,  (Nov.  146.)  to  wish  it  exterminated  from  their  synagogues. 
They  were  led  to  this  in  consequence  of  being  frequently  pressed  by 
quotations  from  it  in  their  arguments  with  the  Christians,  who  in  that 
age  used  this  version  almost  exclusively,  received  it  as  derived  from 
the  Apostles,  and  generally  attributed  to  it  a  divine  authority,  behov- 
ing the  fables  which  were  circulated  respecting  the  pretended  inspi- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  55 

ration  of  the  interpreters.  So  firmly  rooted  was  this  last  erroneous 
opinion,  that  neither  Origen  nor  Jerome  was  able  to  overthrow  it,  and 
Jerome,  who  incurred  obloquy  by  his  contrary  opinion,  was  induced 
occasionally  to  write  as  though  he  allowed  the  inspiration  of  the 
translators. 

§  38.     History  of  the  Alexandrine  version. 

Copies  of  this  version  made  for  the  use  of  the  Jews,  and  afterwards 
of  the  Christians  also,  having  been  multiplied  until  they  amounted  to 
an  immense  number,  the  errors  which  originally  existed  in  the  version 
were  greatly  increased  by  the  addition  of  those  which  were  caused 
by  the  mistakes  of  transcribers.  The  Jews  in  their  controversies 
with  the  Christians  took  advantage  of  this  circumstance  to  make  ob- 
jections to  passages  cited  in  opposition  to  them  from  this  version,  on 
pretence  either  that  they  were  different  from  the  Hebrew  text,  or 
that  they  were  interpolations,  or  that  they  were  mutilated.  Origen, 
in  order  to  meet  this  difficulty,  transcribed  this  and  all  the  other  Greek 
versions  together  with  the  Hebrew  text  itself  in  one  large  volume,  in 
the  order  exhibited  in  the  following  page. 


5'6       GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO  THE    SACRED  BOOK5- 


|3h 


.      ; 

to    ^,l       ■ 

nth 

ion. 

s  e  ^j^ 

i  i^ 

0)    ai 

N 

to  "^     - 

^t^ 

■ 

^       V)          • 

•51 

. 

><    cc 

\n 

to   "^      — 

.>^      la 

'/-.       ^ 

oj             Oi    — 

^ 

:^  r^?« 



Ul     i 

, 

-     %: 

-  c 

«               . 

-c  o 

, 

X     M     - 

s-s 

w 

'O     ^    Vs 

P^  s 

-^sS> 

;> 

•       1 

, 

Vil      1 

s          1 

H^ 

l§ 

.2 

H 

o 

'O 

<^ 

><       50       J 

o 

O  C5 

H 

© 

.o      fc.     UJ 

. 

Vn    50 

c 

5^ 

%' 

b 

5      T      — 

d 

^ 

if  b 

a- 

p 

'o    €    S 

ai 

V    ?■ 

GO 

.-o     C  ^^/' 

, 

!="-  w 

tn 

, 

fc-      Ui 

^ 

<   . 

^   § 

e 

5 

U5       "5      ^3 

>% 

w 

'O     g     5^ 

M 

1     ^o  -^  X/> 

S   s- 

w 

&sy> 

J2 
1 

<5 

2    fc- 

H 

X      a      _; 

i   '^ 

W 

■  <5 

>p^  te 

^ 

o 

-<  « 

O  §3 

3 

1^ 

a  3  c; 

■to    i  - 

-S  " 

o   t. 

:  a 

H 

fe 

1 

O 

r  2  P 

04 

fc-2  f^ 

.2     « 

•S    § 


a  . 

^  o 

«  5    r-, 

o.  o 


.5    ib 


o.  5.  £ 


—       «  H 


rt 

o 

a 

o 

s 

c 

o 

<u 
1 

•So 

o 

-d 

.;y 

M 

o 

Co 

(« 

^ 

e 

fe 

n 

;s 

»1 


)S 

Ho 

« 

*. 

c> 

o 

c 

sa 

5 

•  r* 

s 

w 

tM 

rM 

o 

o 

c 

M^ 

^ 

4> 

•*J 

u 

<r> 

ij 

Cli 

cS 

&. 

1 

1 

to 

O 

n 

1. — 1 

d 

8  a; 

OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


57 


In  this  Polyglot,  which  was  generally  called  Hexapla,  sometimes 
Tetrapla,  and  occasionally  Octapla,  he  observed  the  following  me- 
thod. The  Alexandrine  version  he  placed  in  the  middle,  that  he  might 
correct  it  from  the  other  versions  which  accompanied  it,  yet  without 
altering  the  version  itself.  Where  it  was  deficient  he  supplied  the 
deficiency  from  Theodotion,  Symmachus,  Aquila,  the  5th,  6th,  or  7th 
version,  or  the  Hebrew  text  itself,  denoting  by  means  of  an  asterisk 
that  this  was  an  addition,  and  by  an  initial  letter  the  name  of  the 
translator  from  whom  the  passage  was  taken.  Such  additions  were 
generally  taken  from  the  version  of  Theodotion.  Where  any  thing 
was  found  that  was  not  in  the  Hebrew  text,  he  marked  it  with  an 
obelisk  -j-  or  /  ,  to  denote  that  it  was  wanting.  He  added  to  other 
passages  lemnisks  and  hyperlemnisks,  the  figure  and  signification  of 
which  are  equally  uncertain.  In  this  manner  he  pointed  out  to 
Christians  engaged  in  controversies  with  the  Jews,  what  the  Hebrew 
text  really  did,  or  did  not,  contain.  This  great  work,  comprehended 
in  50  volumes,  finished  at  Tyre  in  the  space  of  27  years,  was  after* 
wards  in  the  year  303  removed  to  Caesarea  to  the  library  of  Pamphi- 
lus,  where  Jerome  corrected  his  Hebrew  copies  after  its  text.  Sub- 
sequently, most  probably  in  the  overthrow  of  Caesarea  by  the  Sara- 
cens, it  was  destroyed,  without  ever  havii  g  ..k  en  transcribed. [a] 

[a)  On  the  character  and  value  of  the  Hexapla  of  Origen,  some  excel- 
lent observations  may  be  found  in  a  dissertation  by  Ernesti,  entitled 
'  Origen  the  Father  of  Grammatical  interpretation,'  translated  in  Hodge's 
Biblical  Repertory,  Vol.  III.  No.  2.  pp.  245—260.     Tr.] 

§  39.     Recensions  of  the  Alexandrine  Version. 

Toward  the  ead  of  the  third  centui-y  and  the  beginning  of  the 
fourth,  three  recensions  of  this  version  appeared.  The  Jirst  was 
edited  by  Lucian,  a  presbyter  of  Antioch,  who  suffered  martyrdom 
in  31 1.  It  was  amended  according  to  the  Hebrew  text,  but  whether 
Lucian  himself  understood  Hebrew  or  whether  he  made  use  of  the 
works  of  Origen,  is  uncertain.  This  edition  was  received  in  the 
churches   from   Antioch   to  Constantinople.      Jerojue,  Pra?f.  I.  in 

Parahp.  and  Ep.  ad  Suniam  et  Fretelam. -The  second  was  edited 

about  the  same  time  by^  Hesychius  in  Egypt.     Whether  it  was  cor- 


58        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACREB  BOOKS 

rected  by  the  Hebrew  text,  or  by  ancient  copies  of  the  Alexandrine 
version,  is  unknown :  it  seems,  however,  that  fewer  changes  were 
made  in  it  than  in  that  of  Lucian.  This  edition  was  received  by  the 
churches  of  Egypt.  Jerome,  Prsef,  I.  in  ParaUp. The  third  re- 
cension, transcribed  by  Eusebius  and  Pamphilus  from  the  Hexapla  of 
Origen  with  ail  the  marks,  was  not  only  received  by  the  churches  of 
Palestine,  but  also  very  common  in  hbraries.  Jerome,  Praef.  I.  in 
Parahp.  The  marks  in  course  of  time  were  altered,  and  at  last 
totally  omitted  ;  whence  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  true  read- 
ing became  even  greater  than  it  had  been  before  the  time  of  Origen, 
inasmuch  as  it  became  impossible  to  distinguish  the  original  text  of 
the  translators  from  the  additions  of  Origen.  This  is  complained  of 
by  Jerome,  Praef  in  lesaiam. 

From  these  three  recensions  all  our  manuscript  copies  have  arisen  •, 
for  the  fourth,  or  Melchite  recension,  proceeded  in  course  of  time 
from  that  of  Lucian,  from  which  it  differed  but  little.  As  none  of 
these  recensions  was  pure  at  its  very  origin,  it  is  plain,  that  the  evil, 
subsequently  increased  by  the  transcribers  of  succeeding  "ages,  must 
be  very  great ;  on  which  account,  the  critical  edition  undertaken  by 
Holmes  in  England,  was  much  desired,  and  it  is  greatly  to  be  regret- 
ted that  its  learned  editor  should  have  died  before  he  had  advanced 
beyond  the  Pentateuch. 


V 


Of  printed  editions,  the  principal  and  most  celebrated  are  the  follow- 
ing :  I.  The  Complutensian,  contained  in  the  Polyglot  so  called,  printed 
1514 — 1517  ;  its  text  has  been  followed  in  the  Paris  and  Antwerp  Poly- 
glots, and  printed  separately  at  Geneva  in  1596  and  1599.  That  it  is  not 
altered  from  the  Hebrew,  as  has  been  supposed,  is  shown  by  Bruns  in 

Eichhorn's  Repertor.  Th.  HI.  S.  174.  Th.  VIII.  S.  109.  flF. II.  The 

Aldine,  printed  at  Venice  in  1518.  Several  very  old  manuscripts  were 
used  by  its  editors,  yet  Masius  asserts  that  its  text  is  very  much  interpo- 
lated from  Theodotion  and  other  ancient  versions.  It  was  printed  sepa- 
rately at  Strasburg,  in  4  vols.  8vo  in  1525  ;  at  Basil,  in  folio,  in  1545,  in 

8vo.  in  1550  and  1582;  and  at  Frankfort,  in  folio,  in  1597. III.  The 

Roman,  taken  from  the  Vatican  Manuscript,  printed  in  1587,  folio.  The 
beginning  as  far  as  Gen.  xlvn,  and  several  other  places,  which  are  want- 
ing in  the  MS.,  have  been  supplied  from  other  manuscripts,  while  other 
places  have  been  slightly  altered  by  the  editors.  Its  text  is  followed  in 
the  London  Polyglot,  and  has  been  printed  separately  with  many  altera- 
tions at  London  in    1653.  which  altered  edition  was  very  incorrectly 


I 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  59 

printed  by  Leusdeu,  at  Amsterdam  in  1685.     The  Cambridge  edition,* 

1665,  and  that  of  1697,t  contain  the  same  text. IV.  The  edition  of 

Bos,  with  various  readings,  printed  at  Franeker  in  1709.  The  text  is 
taken  from  the  Paris  or  London  Polyglot.   From  this  edition  those  of  Rei- 

neccius,  1730,  1757,  and  of  Mill,  1725,|  are  taken. V.  The  edition  of 

Grabe,  from  the  ancient  Alexandrine  Manuscript,  but  with  many  altera- 
tions from  the  Vatican  and  other  manuscripts,  and  from  conjecture,  which 
are  given  in  a  smaller  character,  printed  at  Oxford  1707 — 1720,  in  four 
folio  volumes.^  VI.  The  edition  of  Breitinger,  containing  the  Alexan- 
drine text  according  to  the  edition  of  Grabe,  but  with  the  marks  of  the 
Hexapla,  and  the  various  readings  of  the  Vatican  MS.  as  given  in  the 

Roman  edition,  printed  in  4  vols.   4to,  at   Zurich,   1730 — 1732. 

[VII.  The  edition  of  Holmes,  containing  the  text  of  the  Roman  edition, 
with  the  various  readings  of  all  the  MSS.  known  to  be  extant,  beauti- 
fully printed  in  folio,  Oxford,  1798 — 1818.  The  first  volume,  containing 
the  Pentateuch,  was  edited  by  Holmes.  The  second,  containing  from 
Joshua  to  II.  Chronicles  inclusive,  was  published  after  his  decease,  upon 
his  plan,  by  the  Rev.  J .  Parsons.  The  third  is  now  publishing  by  the  same 
editor.  See  Horne,  Introd.  II.  182.  TV.]  In  all  these  editions  the 
book  of  Daniel  is  in  the  version  of  Theodotion.  The  Alexandrine  ver- 
sion of  this  book  was  first  published  from  a  Chisian  manuscript  at  Rome, 
with  many  dissertations,  in  folio,  1772.  It  was  reprinted  at  G6ttingen,in 
8vo.  in  1773,  and  in  4to.  with  some  other  pieces,  in  l774.[a]  || 

[a)  For  accurate  notices  of  the  principal  editions  of  the  LXX,  see  De 
Wette,  Einleit.  §  47.  Anm.  (b)  and  Horne,  Introd.  II.  178—183.    Tr.] 

*  [With  a  learned  preface  by  Bishop  Pearson.     Tr.] 

t  [Edited  by  Cluver.  The  edition  published  at  the  Clarendon  press,  Oxford,  1817, 
also  follows  this  text.     TV.] 

t  [Also  that  of  Valpy,  8vo.  1819.     TV.] 

^  [The  first  and  fourth  of  these,  containing  the  Octateuch  and  the  metrical  books, 
were  published  by  Grabe  himself;  the  second,  comprising  the  historical  books,  by 
Francis  Lee,  M.  D.  ;  and  the  third,  containing  the  prophetical  books,  by  W.  Wigan, 
S.  T.  D.   It  was  printed  at  the  same  time,  from  the  same  t3rpes,  in  8  vols.  8vo.     Tr.} 

II  [The  Alexandrine  version  of  Daniel  was  published  together  with  that  of  Theo- 
dotion by  Holmes,  in  a  maimer  corresponding  to  bis  edition  of  the  Pentateuch,  in 
1805.    TV.] 


60         GENERAL  FNTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

§  40.     The  Version  of  Aquila. 

Aquila,  as  Irenaeus*  and  Jerome  t  testify,  and  his  method  of 
translating  shows,  was  a  Jew  ;  the  other  circumstances  that  Epipha- 
niusj  relates  concerning  him  are  by  no  means  probable.  He  trans- 
lated the  Hebrew  Bible  into  Greek  during  the  interval  between  the 
years  90  and  130  after  C'hiist,  with  the  intention  of  exhibiting  to  the 
Hellenistic  Jews  an  accurate  representation  of  the  Hebrew  text,  for 
their  assistance  in  their  disputes  with  the  Christians.  Yet  he  did 
not  on  this  account  pervert  the  passages  which  relate  to  Christ  by 
xmfaithful  translations,  as  some  of  the  ancients  thought ;  for  the  ex- 
amples of  designed  want  of  fidelity,  which  they  produce,  are  nothing 
more  than  etymological  renderings,  or  expressions  of  the  same  things  in 
other  words,  or  various  readings,  or  else  his  own  mistakes.  His  version 
is  so  literal,  that  he  expresses  not  only  those  Hebrew  particles  which 
have  no  corresponding  terms  in'  Greek,  but  even  the  etymology  of 
words.  In  order  to  secure  the  greater  accuracy  in  his  work,  he 
edited  it  a  second  time.  This  scrupulous  nicety  makes  his  version 
so  obscure,  that  it  cannot  be  understood  without  being  collated  with 
the  Hebrew  text :  hence  it  happens  that  Jerome  sometimes  finds 
fault  with  Aquila  as  a  captious  translator,  and  sometimes  praises  him 
as  very  critical  and  diligent.  Jerome  Epist.  ad  Pammachiuro, 
Comm.  in  Jes.  c.  viii.  and  Comm.  in  Hos.  2.  Comp.  Dathii  Opusc. 
p.  1.  ss. 

§41.     The  Version  of  Theodotion. 

Theodotion  is  called  an  Ephesian  by  Irenaeus§,  and  a  semichristian 
or  Ebionite  by  EusebiusI!  and  Jerome. IT  The  account  which  Epi- 
phanius,  a-  learned  writer,  but  possessed  of  very  little  judgment,  gives 
of  him,  may  as  well  be  omitted.'if.'Theodotion  wrote  his  version  du- 
ring the  first  half  of  the  second  century  ;  for  it  is  cited  not  only  by 
Justin,  A.  D.  160,  in  his  dialogue|with  Trypho,  but  also  by  Irenaeus 
who  lived  in  Gaul,  A.  D.  177.     His  object  seems  to  have  been  to 

*.  [Cont.  Her.Lib.  III.  Cap.  24.] 

t  [Praef.  in^  Ezram>t  Nehem.  and  Praef,  I.  injJob.] 

t  [Dc  Pond,  et  Mens.  Cap.  13.] 

§  [Cont.  Her.  iii.  24.]  ||  [Hist.  Eccles.  V.  riii.] 

1  fPraef.  in  Ezram.  et  Neh.  et  in  Job.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEN'l.  61 

indicate  to  such  of  his  fellow  sectarians,  the  Ebionites,  as  might  be 
engaged  in  controversy  with  the  Jews,  the  true  reading  of  the  He- 
brew text.  This  translation  is  so  closely  copied  from  the  Alexan- 
drine version  that  almost  his  whole  aim  seems  to  have  been  to  add 
what  was  wanting  in  that  version,  to  take  away  what  was  superfluous, 
and  to  correct  what  was  inaccurately  rendered  ;  in  doing  which  he  has 
not  manifested  any  great  erudition.  It  is  not  unworthy  of  remark  that 
he  has  retained  several  Hebrew  words,  which  seem  to  have  been  used 
among  the  Ebionites  ;  such  as  (psyuX,  Levit.  vii.  18.,  (XMacpaxt,  Le- 
vit.  xiii.  6.,  xwXuju-a,  Deut.  xxii.  9.,  sSSifi,,  Isa.  Ixiv.  5. 

§  42.      The  Version  of  Symmachus. 

Symmachus,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Eusebius*  and  Je- 
rome,! was  a  semichristian  or  Ebionite  :  what  Epiphaniusj  teUs 
concerning  him  is  of  doubtful  credit.  His  version,  as  Jerome  fre- 
quently asserts,  was  pubhshed  after  that  of  Theodotion  :  this  appears 
also  from  the  fact  that  Irenaeus  who  often  quotes  Theodotion,  never 
mentions  Symmachus,  which  shows  at  least  that  his  version  had  not 
at  that  time  (A.  D,  177.)  reached  as  far  as  Gaul.  Symmachus  was 
better  acquainted  with  the  rules  of  translation  than  his  fellow  inter- 
preters, and  has  observed  them  more  accurately  ;  for  he  has  not,  says 
Jerome,  translated  word  for  word,  like  Aquila,  but  according  to  the 
sense. §  He  bestowed  upon  his  work  the  care  of  a  revision,  as  we 
learn  from  Jerome,  Comm.  in  Nahum  3,  and  in  Jerem.  32.  For 
these  reasons  his  version  is  celebrated  by  the  ancients  as  perspicuous, 
clear,  plain,  and  worthy  of  admiration.  Comp.  Hody  De  Text. 
Original,  p.  588.  Thieme,  Diss,  de  puritate  Symmachi,  1735,  lAp- 


•    [Hist.  Eccles.  VI.  xvii.] 

t  [Pracf.  in  Ezrann  et  Neh.,  et  in  Job,  et  Comment  in  Hab.  3.] 
II  [De  Pond,  et  Mens.  c.  16.] 

5  [Non  verbum  e  rerbo,  ut  Aquila,  sed  sensnm  ex  sensu  transtulit.  Praef.  I.  an 
Job.] 


V, 


62    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

§  43.     Fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  Greek  laersions. 

These  three  versions  by  anonymous  authors,  none  of  which  extend 
to  the  whole  number  of  the  sacred  books,  are  designated  by  the  num- 
bers of  the  columns  which  they  occupied  in  the  Hexapla.  The  au- 
thoi  of  the  sixth  was  a  Christian  ;  for  he  renders  Hab.  iii.  13.  5ia 
Iritfou  Xpiffou.  The  object  of  these  three  translators  seems  to  have 
been  to  instruct  th'>se  belonging  to  their  side  of  the  question  who 
might  be  engaged  in  the  controversies  between  the  Jews  and  tl  e  (  hris- 

tians,  in  the  contt  nts  of  the  Hebrew  text. All  three  contained  the 

Psalms  and  minor  Prophets  the  fifth  and  sixth  the  Pentateuch  and 
Canticles  in  addition,  and  the  fifth  and  seventh  beside  the  books  just 
mentioned  those  of  Kings,  fragments  of  which  were  found  by  Bruns 

in  a  Syriac  Hexaplar  Manuscript  at  Paris.* The  fifth  and  sixth 

frequently  accord  with  Theodotion,  and  the  seventh  appears  to  be  the 
work  of  a  learned  interpreter. 

Origen  in  Jerome  (Praef.  ad  Homil.  Orig.  in  Cant.)  relates  that  the 
fifth  version  was  found  in  a  cask  at  Nicopolis  in  Actium.  Epiphanius 
gives  the  same  account  of  the  sixth,  adding  that  the  Ji/th  and  seventh  were 
found  at  Jericho.  Eusebius'  account  of  this  matter,  E.  H.  VI.  xvi.  is  ra- 
ther  obscure. 

§  44.     Remains  of  the  GreeJc  versions. 

These  six  versions  in  course  of  time  became  neglected,  not  only 
by  the  Jews  and  Ebionites,  but  also  by  the  Christians  ;  hence  they 
have  all  perished,  nothing  remaining  but  some  fragments  found  in  the 
works  of  ecclesiastical  writers,  in  some  very  ancient  Hexaplar  manu- 
scripts, and  in  a  Syriac  Hexaplar  version.  From  these  the  indefati- 
gable industry  of  the  learned  has  endeavoured  to  restore  the  Hexapla 
of  Origen,  and,  considering  the  difficulty  of  the  task,  much  has  been 
done  to  effect  it.  The  first  who  collected  these  scattered  fragments 
was  Peter  Morin,  who  added  all  that  he  could  find  to  his  edition  of 
the  Alexandrine  version,  published  in  1687.  At  the  same  time 
Drusius  was  labouring  upon  a  collection,  which  was  first  pubhshed 
in  1622.  Martianai  collected  a  considerable  number  of  fragments 
from  the  works  of  Jerome,  and  added  them  to  the  third  volume  of 


[See  EiCHH.  Repert.  VIII.  Th.  S.  100.  f.  IX.  Th.  S.  157.  ff.  X.  Th,  S.  W.ff.J 


I 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  63 

his  edition  of  those  works,  published  in  1699,  at  Paris.  All  these 
were  collected  into  one  body,  and  increased  by  the  addition  of  many 
other  fragments,  by  Montfaucon,  who  pubhshed  the  whole  at  Paris, 
in  2  vols,  foho,  in  1714.  Bahrdt  reprinted  this  work  at  Leipzig, 
1769 — 1770,  but  his  edition  is  so  fiiU  of  errors  as  to  be  of  no  utility. 
In  the  last  century  several  learned  men,  particularly  Semler,  Scharf- 
enberg,  Doederlein,  Matthai,  Biuns,  Adler,  Schleusner,  Loesi'er,  and 
Fischer,  have  corrected  many  parts  of  the  preceding  collections,  and 
increased  them  by  large  additions.*  It  is  much  to  be  wished,  that 
all  were  pubhshed  in  a  single  collection,  [a] 

There  is  extant  in  the  library  of  St.  Mark's  at  Venice,  a  manuscript  of 
a  Greek  version  of  the  Pentateuch,  Proverbs,  Rath,  Canticles,  Ecclesi- 
astes,  Daniel,  and  Lamentations,  which  seems  to  have  been  made  from 
the  Hebrew  text  in  the  eleventh  century.  It  is  of  no  great  consequence, 
and  yet  not  wholly  deserving  of  neglect.  Part  of  it  has  been  published  by 
ViLLOiSON,  at  Strasburg,  in  1784,  and  the  Pentateuch  l)y  Ammon.  1790 
— 1791.   Comp.  EiCHHORN,  Allgemeine  Bibliothek,  VII.  B.  S.  194 — 203. 

[a)  Among  these  fragments  the  following  are  to  be  met  with :  viz. 
6  'EjSpaioj,  0  2u^og,  6  'EXXrjvixoff,  to  2a(ji,ap£iT»xov,  6  aXkog  and  o 

uvstiy^a^pog. The  'ESgaiog  agrees  generally  with  Jerome,  and  the 

explanations  of  the  Hebrew  words  under  this  name  were  according  to  all 
appearances  borrowed,  at  least  in  a  great  measure,  from  Jerome  by 
the  owners  of  manuscripts,  on  the  margin  of  which  they  are  found.  [It 
derives  its  name  from  its  correspondence  with  the  original.  TV.]  The 
2upog  appears  in  like  manner  to  be  Jerome,  who  lived  a  long  time  in  Pa- 
lestine, consequently  in  a  part  of  Syria,  and  is  therefore  really  called  a 
Syrian  by  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  in  Photius.  It  constantly  agrees  with 
Jerome.  Comp.  Doederlein,  Diss,  qui  sit  6  2u^off  V.  T.  interpres 
Alidorf^  1772.  Who  is  meant  by  the  'EXXi^vixoj  las  not  yet  been  ascer- 
tained  The  2affcag£iTixov  is  undoubtedly  the  reading  of  the  Samari- 
tan text,  but  it  remains  uncertain  whether  it  sprang  from  a  Samaritan 

Greek  version,  or  was  borrowed  Irom  Origen. The  aXXof  or  the 

Aveiriy^OKpoj  appears  to  be  a  negligent  quotation,  where  the  writer  had 
not  taken  the  trouble  to  mark  the  author's  name,  or  else  was  unacquaint- 
ed with  it.] 

*  See  RosENMUELLER's  Handbucb  fur  die  Literatur  der  Bibl.  Erit.  und  Exeg. 
n.  Th.  S.  459.  fif.  [For  a  notice  of  these  several  works,  see  a  note  in  Fiscberi 
(J.  F.)  Clavis  Reliqniarum  Versionum  Graecorum  V.  T.  Specimen,  in  Comm.  Theol. 
•»  Vblxhuesen,  Tom.  IV.  pp.  204—207.     Tr.'\ 


^4         GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  TITE  SACRED  BOOKS 

§  45.     Samaritan  Version,  [a] 

The  author  and  date  of  the  Samaritan  version  are  unknown,  but  it 
is  certainly  much  older  than  the  7th  century  ;  perhaps  it  belongs  to 
the  3d  or  4th.  It  follows  the  HebraBO-Samaritan  text  word  for  word, 
except  that  sometimes,  especially  where  the  Deity  is  represented  with 
human  form  or  passions,  or  where  appearances  of  God  are  mentioned, 
it  renders  the  name  of  God  by  <  the  angel  of  God  ;'  this  peculiarity 
does  not,  as  John  Morin  thought,  belong  to  the  Samaritans  alone, 
for  it  occurs  also  in  the  Aiabic  version  of  the  Jew  Saadias  Gaon,[6] 
and  is  almost  the  same  with  the  mn'T  mo'O  of  the  Chaldee  para- 

phrases.  The  changes  of  the  guttural  letters,  which  frequently 
recur,  are  not  various  readings,  but  errors  of  transcription,  arising 
from  the  circumstance  that  the  Samaritans  do  not  pronounce  those 
letters.  Frequently  two  readings  of  a  single  passage  are  given. 
The  various  readings  of  this  translation  were  published  by  Castell 
in  the  6th  volume  of  tlie  London  Polyglot.  Comp.  Mich^lis,  Ein- 
leit.  in  die  Gbttl.  Schrift.  des  A.  B.  §  64.  S.  337—340. 

This  version  is  published  in  the  Paris  and  London  Polyglots. 

[a)  Comp.  EiCHHORN,  §  303 — 305.     SiMow,  L.  II.  c.  xvii.     Tr.j 

[b)  Gaon  or  Uaggaon  is  not  a  proper  name,  but  a  title  of  honour, 
llXjn,  equivalent  to  excellent,  illustrious,  applied  to  the  masters  of  the 

schools  of  Babylon.  See  Bartolocci,  Biblioth.  Rabbin.  P.  III.  p.  668. 
WoLFii,  Biblioth.  Heb.  Tom.  I.  p.  932—936.  Baswage,  Hist,  des 
Juifs,  VII.  c.  iv.  5  2.     Tr.] 

§  46.     Tar  gum  of  Onkelos.  [a] 

The  ChaHee  paraphrases  are  known  hy  the  name  of  Targums.* 
The  most  celebrated  among  them  is  that  of  the  Pentateuch,  ascribed 
to  Onkelos,  whom  the  Babylonian  Talmud  makes  contemporary  with 
Gamaliel,  adding  many  incoherent  tales  respecting  him  :  it  is  evident 
however,  that  he  lived  several  centuries  before  the  Talmudical  wri-  ; 
ters,  since  they  knew  so  httle  of  him,  although  he  wrote  in  Baby- 

*  [From  the  word  DU"in,  which  means  a  version  or  an  interpretation.    Comp. 
Ez.  iv.  7.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  65 

Ionia.  Onkelos,  therefore,  would  seem  to  have  written  not  in  the 
fourth  or  fifth  century  of  the  Christian  era,  but  in  the  third,  or 
rather  in  the  second,  and  this  is  confinned  by  his  paraphrase  itself; 
for  it  not  only  closely  follows  the  Hebrew  text,  and  is  free  from 
those  fables  and  digressions  with  which  the  later  books  of  its  kind 
are  filled,  but  it  is  also  wri(t(  n  in  a  Chaldce  dialect  which  approxi- 
mates nearly  to  that  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  and  is  not  adultesated  with 
that  multitude  of  foreign  words  with  which  the  later  puaphrases 
abound.  The  work  indeed  is  not  mentioned  by  Oiigen  or  Jerome, 
but  Origen  was  ignorant  of  (IJhaldee,  and  Jerome  only  learned  it  in 
his  old  age  ;  besides,  a  work  composed  in  Babylonia  in  the  se- 
cond century,  could  hardly  liave  become  known  to  Origen  or  Je- 
rome in  Palestine  in  the  third  and  fourth,  when  the  Mishna  of  the 
Tahnud,  written  in  Palestine  between  the  years  190  and  220,  was 
little  known  in  Babylonia,  and  did  not  obtain  a  Gemara  (or  comment- 
ary) until  the  fifth  century. 

The  principal  editions  of  this  paraphrase  are  the  following :  at  Bono- 
nia,  in  1483,  with  the  commentary  of  Jarchi ;  without  mention  of  place, 
in  1490 ;  at  Lisbon,  in  1491 ;  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century  without 
date  or  place  ;  in  the  Complutensian  Polyglot,  under  the  inspection  of 
some  learned  Jewish  converts,  who  changed  the  points  in  many  places ; 
in  the  Antwerp  Polyglot,  after  the  Complutensian  text,  but  with  some 
changes  of  the  points  and  omissions  of  the  matres  lectionis :  at  Venice, 
by  Bomberg,  from  a  MS.  copy,  in  1518,  and  again  with  corrections  from 
another  MS.  in  1526  :  from  this  last  edition  those  which  followed  were 
taken,  until  in  1616,  Buxtorf,  in  his  edition,  altered  the  points  according 
to  the  rules  of  grammar,  and  here  and  there  the  text  itself,  according  to 
the  Hebrew  and  his  own  conjectures;*  this  last  edition  has  been  followed 
in  the  Paris  and  London  Polyglots.  A  Latin  translation  of  the  para- 
phrase of  Onkelos,  with  notes,  was  published  by  Fagius,  at  Strasburg,  in 

j]   1547,  in  folio. 

[a)  Or  the  subject  of  this  and  the  four   following  sections,  Comp. 

ij  HoRNE,  Vol.  II.  pp.  157—163.    Carpzov,  Pars  II.  Cap.  I.  p.  430—481. 

||  EicHHORN,  \  213—245.    Bauer,  ^  59—81.  p.  288—308.    Simon,  L.  II. 

;  *  [This  assertion,  which  is  made  also  by  Eichhorn  in  his  first  edition,  Th.  L 
\\  S.  437,  is  denied  by  De  Wette,  Einl.  ^  58.  anm.  c,  who  affirms  that  Biixtorf  merely 
i  changed  the  pmictuation.  Eichhorn  in  his  third  edition,  Th.  II.  S.  28,  has  some- 
'  what  modified  his  assertion,  though  without  entirely  acquitting  Buxtorf  from  the 
charge  of  an  undne  attachment  to  the  Hebrew  test.     Tr.l 

0 


66         GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

c.  xviii.  Prideaux,  Part  II.  Book  viii.  An.  37.  p.  531 — 555.  On  the 
Targum  of  Onkelos,  particularly,  De  Wette  Einleit.  J  58,  and  Winer, 
de  Onkeloso  ejusque  Paraphrasi  Chaldaica,  Lips.  1820,  4to.     TV.] 

§  47.     Targum  of  Jonathan  on  the  Prophets. 

Jonathan,  the  son  of  Uzziel,  is  in  the  Babylonian  Talmud  (Bava 
Bathra,  c.  8.  p.  134,  and  Succoth,  p.  28.)  called  the  disciple  of  HUlel, 
and  the  colleague  of  Simeon,  and  (Tract.  Megilloth,  c.  1.  p.  3.)  many 
wonderful  things  are  related  of  him.  From  this  it  is  plain  that  he 
must  have  lived  long  before  the  time  of  the  Talmudists,  and  not,  as 
some  have  supposed,  in  the  5th  or  6th  century,  since,  in  that  case,  his 
histoiy  would  have  been  better  known.  In  confirmation  of  this  we 
may  adduce  the  citation  of  this  paraphrase,  written  in  Palestine,  in 
the  Babylonian  Gemara  ;  but  as  it  is  not  cited  in  the  Gemara  of  Je- 
rusalem, it  must  have  been  either  recently  published,  or  not  at  all,  in 
the  year  282  when  the  author  of  that  Gemara  died,  [a]  This  para- 
phrase contains  the  books  of  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  Kings,  Isaiah, 
Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  the  twelve  minor  prophets.  Its  language  is 
not  as  pure  as  that  of  Onkelos,  yet  it  does  not  contain  as  many 
foreign  words  as  the  more  recent  Targums,  and  is  free  from  the  di* 
gressions  and  idle  tales  with  which  they  abound.  Hence  arises  an 
additional  proof  of  the  correctness  of  the  date  above  assigned  to  the 
work.  Neither  the  language  nor  the  method  of  interpretation  is  the 
same  in  all  the  books  :  in  the  historical  works  the  text  is  translated 
with  greater  accuracy  than  elsewhere  ;  in  some  of  the  prophets,  as 
in  Zechariah,  the  interpretation  has  more  of  the  Rabbinical  and  Tal- 
mudical  character.  From  this  variety  we  may  properly  infer  that  the 
work  is  a  collection  of  interpretations  of  several  learned  men,  made 
towards  the  close  of  the  third  century,  and  containing  some  of  a 
much  older  date  :  for  that  some  parts  of  it  existed  as  early  as  in  the 
second  century,  appears  from  the  additions  I.  Sam.  xvii.  12 — 31,  41, 
50,55 — 58.  xviii.  1 — 5,  9 — 11,  17 — 19,  which  have  been  transfer- 
red from  some  Chaldee  paraphrase  into  the  Hebrew  text,  and  were 
already  read  in  the  text  in  the  second  century.    See  below,  §  136. 

The  first  prophetical  books  of  this  version  were  printed  at  Liria  ^r: 
1494,  fol.*     After  this  edition  they  were  printed  together  with  Onkelr 

'  [With  the  Helt>rew  text,  and  the  commentaries  of  Levi  and  Kimciii.    3V.I 


OP   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  67 

in  the  Bomberg  and  other  editions  of  that  paraphrast.  The  lesser  pro- 
phets have  been  often  printed  collectively  or  separately.*  The  whole 
twelvet  at  Paris,  in  1557.  Micah,  Nahum,  Habakkuk,  Zephaniah, 
Haggai,  Zechariah,  and  Malachi,  at  Paris,  in  1552.  Hosea,  without 
mention  of  place,  in  1556.  Hosea,  with  the  commentaries  of  Aben 
Ezra,  Solomon  Jarchi,  and  Kimchi4  at  Helmstadt,  in  1702.5 

[a)  Gesewius,  (agreeing  with  Prideaux,  P.  11.  B  viii.  Anno  37. 
p.  531,  542 — 545.)  maintains  the  correctness  of  the  opinion  that  Jona- 
than Ben  Uzziel  lived  a  short  time  before  the  birth  of  Christ.  Jesaia, 
Einleit.  §  11.  Th.  I.  S.  65.  ff.     IV.] 

§  48.     Targum  of  tJte  Pseudo- Jonathan  on  the  Pentateuch. 

There  is  a  Targum  on  the  Pentateuch  which  is  ascribed  to  tlie 
same  Jonathan  that  paraphrased  the  Prophets  ;  but  that  it  is  not  his 
is  proved,  not  only  by  the  language,  which  contains  a  greater  number 
of  foreign  terms,  and  by  the  inferiority  of  the  style,  but  also  by  the 
number  of  tales  and  dialogues  which  are  inserted  in  it,  and  by  the 
frequent  errors  which  betray  a  gross  ignorance  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage, or  an  extreme  degree  of  negligence.  The  confounding  of 
the  Hebrew  ]iSk  Gen.  xxxv.  8,  with  the  Greek  aXXov,  and  translating 
it  pniN,  is  a  remarkable  instance.  Besides,  the  mention  of  Constauv 
tinople  and  of  the  Turks,  Gen.  x.  2,  and  Lombards,  Num.  xxiv.  24, 
are  proofs  that  it  was  not  written  before  the  seventh  or  eighth 
century.  It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  compiled  from  older 
interpretations. 

§  49.     Jerusalem  Targum  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  Jerusalem  Targum  contains  interpretations  of  select  passages 
only  of  the  Pentateuch.  These  generally  agree  with  those  of  the 
Pseudo-Jonathan ;  and  when  they  differ,  they  are  not  better.  The 
language  is  full  of  Greek,  Latin,  and  Persian  words.  This  work  is 
more  modern  than  that  of  the  Pseudo-Jonathan,  or  certainly  not 
more  ancient.  It  seems  to  have  been  compiled,  however,  from  more 
ancient  works,  and  hence  contains  many  sentences  which  are  found 

*  [Hosea,  Joel,  Amos,  Obadiah,  and  Jonah,  by  Robert  Stephens  in  1545.     TV.] 
t  [Under  the  care  of  Mercer.     TV.]  i  [By  Herman  Von  der  Hardt.     Tr.] 

^  [  And  again,  under  the  care  of  J.  D.  Michaelis,  at  Goettingen,  177.5.    Tr,} 


68   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

in  the  New  Testament,  having  probably  been  common  among  the    \ 
Jews  of  that  age  ;  such  as  "  the  first  and  second  death,"  Rev.  xx. 
6,  14  ;  "  our  Father  in  heavqn,"  Matt.  vi.  9  ;  "  who  is,  and  was,  and 
is  to  come,"  Rev.  i.  4;  "with  what  measure  ye  mete  it  shall  be 
measured  to  you  again,"  Luke  vi.  38. 

This  Taricum  has  always  been  printed  with  those  of  Onkelos  and  the 
Pseudci- Jonathan. 

§  50.     The  other  Chaldee  Paraphrases.  < 

The  other  Chaldee  paraphrases  are  neither  older  nor  better  than 
the  preceding,  but  abound  with  digressions  and  fictions.  There  are 
paraphrases  of  Psalms,  Job,  and  Proverbs,  which  are  attributed  by 
the  Jews  to  Joseph  the  Blind,  who  is  said  to  have  taught  in  the  third 
century  at  Sora  in  Babylonia :  but  they  contain  many  things  which 
are  more  recent  than  that  age,  and  occasionally  exhibit  two  different 
interpretations  of  a  single  passage,  which  proves  that  they  are  a  col- 
lection of  ancient  interpretations.  Dathe  (Opusc.  p.  106 — 129) 
has  shown  that  the  paraphrase  of  Proverbs  has  been  made  from  the 
Peshito  Syriac  version.  In  addition  to  the  preceding  there  are 
three  paraphrases  of  the  book  of  Esther,  and  a  fourth  of  the  addi- 
tions to  that  book  ;  a  Targum  on  the  Megilloth,  viz.  the  books  of 
Ruth,  Esther,  Canticles,  Lamentations,  and  Ecclesiastes ;  and  a 
Targum  on  the  Chronicles.  There  is  no  paraphrase  of  Daniel, 
Ezra,  or  Nehemiah. 

§  51.     Peshito  Syriac  Version.[a] 

q 

The  'Syriac  version  which  is  called   I  Xf.^O|  Peshito,  (i.  e.   Sim- 
ple,)  is  carried  back  by  the  Syrians  sometimes  to  the  age  of  Solo-1 
mon,  sometimes  to  the  time  of  the  ove.throw  of  the  kingdom  of  Is- 
rael, and  sometimes  to  the  days  of    i  haddeus  the    \post!e.* \llj 

that  is  certain  respecting  it  is,  that  about  the  middle  of  the  4th  cen-j 
tury  it  was  cited  by  Ephrem   the  Syrian   (who  died  A.  D.  379,) 
widely  circulated  and  well  known  to  every  body  :  it  must,  therefore 
have  been  much  older  than  his  time,  and  perhaps  belongs  to  the  se 

[*  Abulfaragius  in  EiCHU.  <^  259.    TV.] 


OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  69 

cond  century.  This  conjecture  is  the  more  probable,  as  that  century 
may  almost  be  called  the  age  of  versions,  and  as  the  Syrian  church 
was  then  in  a  very  flourishing  state,  had  at  Edessa  a  church  built  after 
the  model  of  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  vpould  hardly  have  been 
without  a  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  reading  of  which  in  the 

churches  had  been  introduced  by  the  Apostles. That  it  is  derived 

immediately  from  the  Hebrew  text,  is  proved  by  many  readings  which 
can  only  be  explained  from  the  Hebrew  :  yet  it  manifests  some  affi- 
nity with  the  Alexandrine  version,  partly  because  the  translator  or 
translators  have  occasionally  consulted  that  vession,  and  partly  be- 
cause the   Syrians  have   subsequently   corrected   their  version  very 

greatly  by  the  Alexandrine. The  translation  is  exceedingly  good, 

yet  not  equal  in  every  book  ;  the  manner  of  translating  is  ditlerent  in 
the  Pentateuch  from  that  in  Chronicles  :  and  in  Ecclesiastes  and 
Canticles,  as  well  as  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  some  Chaldaisms 
occur :  hence  the  version  seems  to  have  been  the  work  of  more  than 
one  author. 

The  Peshito  was  first  printed  in  the  Paris  Polyglot,  from  an  imperfect 
MS.,  the  (Jeficiencies  of  which  were  supplied,  with  great  want  of  critical 
acumen,  by  translations  from  the  Latin  V^ulgate  by  Gabriel  Sionita,  the 
editor.  This  text  was  copied  in  the  London  Polyglot,  but  with  correc- 
tions, and  additions  of  what  was  wanting  in  the  MS.,  from  four  other 
MSS.  [The  Psalms  have  been  printed  separately ;  at  Mount  Libanus  in 
1585,  folio,  and  again  in  1610;  at  Paris,  from  three  MSS.  by  Gabriel  Sio- 
nita in  1626,  in  4to. ;  and  at  Leyden  from  two  MSS.,  by  Erjjenius,  in  1625. 
The  text  of  Erpenius  was  reprinted  at  Leipzig,  in  1768,  in  8vo.,  with  va- 
rious readings  from  the  London  Polyglot  and  with  critical  notes  by  Dathe. 
The  Pentatfiuch  was  published  after  the  text  of  the  London  Polyglot,  with 
various  readings  by  G.  G.  Kirsch,  at  Leipzig,  1787,  in  4to.] 

[a)  Oi>  'he  subject  ofthis  and  the  next  section,  Comp.  Horne  Vol.  IL 
pp.  187—190.  Carpz.  p.  (I.  Cap.  V  }  2.  p.  622-640.  Eichh.  }  246— 
274.  BAUi-R,  }  82—86   Simon,  L.  II.  c.  xv.     Tr] 

§  52.     Mediate  Syriac  Versions. 

The  other  Syriac  versions  have  been  made  from  the  Alexandrine 
version  :*  the  following  are  the  principal. 

*  [And  therefore  tbey  are  called  mediate,  as  those  made  directly  from  the  original 
are  denominated  immediate.    Tr,] 


70      GENERAL  INTRonUCTlON    TO  THE    SACRED   KOOKfe 

I.  The  Syriac  Hexaplar  with  all  the  marks  used  in  the  edition  of 
Eusebius  and  Pamphilus,  was  translated  (if  we  may  believe  the  sub- 
scription to  the  Paris  manuscript  of  the  second  book  of  Kings)  by 
Paul  of  Tela  in  the  year  617.  Comp.  Eichhorn  and  Bruns  in  Re- 
pert,  fiir  bibl.  und  morgenl.  Literat.  VII.  Th.  S.  225—250  and 
Bruns  in  VIII.  Th.  S.  86—1 12  :  also  Hasse  Specimen  libri  IV.  Re- 
gum  Syro-Hexapl.  1782.  Jena.  A  manuscript  copy  of  this  version, 
of  the  8th  or  9th  century,  is  preserved  in  the  Milan  library  ;  it  com- 
prises only  the  second  part  of  the  bible  (Eichh.  Repert.  III.  Th.  S. 
166 — 213)  :  the  first  part  was  contained  in  a  manuscript  formerly 
in  the  possession  of  Masius,  which  has  not  as  yet  been  found.  The 
2d  or  4th  book  of  Kings  and  the  book  of  Daniel  are  found  in  a  MS. 
marked  No.  5.  in  the  Imperial  library  at  Paris.  Jeremiah  and 
Ezekiel  have  been  published  from  the  Milan  MS.  byNorberg,  in  Swe- 
den, in  1787  ;  and  Daniel,  from  the  same  MS.  by  Bugati  at  Milan,  in 
1788.  Rosen.  Handbuch  fiir  die  Lit.  der.  Bib.  Krit.  iii.  Th.  S.  30 
—36. 

II.  The  Philoxenian  Version,  derives  its  name  from  Philoxenus 
bishop  of  HierapoUs  in  the  province  of  Aleppo  between  488  and  518. 
He,  however,  is  not  the  author,  but  through  his  influence  his  suf- 
fragan bishop  Polycarp  undertook  and  completed  the  task.  This  ver- 
sion is  very  literal. 

III.  An  anonymous  version  used  by  the  western  Syrians,  which  from 
Pocock's  reading  and  interpretation  of  a  passage  of  Abulfaragius. 

cJ^-^VJOkAAA/'  \«._«\iD  >«>^2^l/0  ^  has  been  called  The  Figu- 
rative, {Figurata;)  but  the  celebrated  De  Sacy,  Professor  of  the 
Arabic  and  Persian  languages  at  Paris,  in  a  letter  dated  the  24th  of 
January,  1803,  informs  me,  that  this  passage  is  not  so  read  in  the 
manuscripts  of  Abulfaragius  which  are  preserved  at  Paris,  but  in 

two  runs  thus,  ^jJOUL^aaaF '    )  V^^*^  "*V^^^  ^^'^  ^"^  ^^  three 

others  thus,  rjJwAjLA.x>\J/ m    >  V"'^'^  ^  A^^^^r*   according  to 

which  Abulfaragius  will  say,  that  the  western  Syrians  possessed  two 
versions,  the  one  called  the  Peshito,  and  made  from  the  Hebrew 
text,  according  to  some   in  the   time  of  Thaddeeus  the  ApostIe» 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  71 

accordiiig  to  others  in  the  age  of  Solomon  the  son  of  David  and  of 
Hiram  King  of  Tyre ;  and  the  other  made  from  the  Septuagint. 
J)e  Sacy,  by  whom  this  version  has  been  examined,  thinks  it  origina- 
ted in  the  3d  or  4th  century  ;  but  according  to  the  subscription, 
Jacob  of  Edessa,  in  the  year  708  or  712,  in  the  monastery  of  Te- 
leda,  altered  it  from  the  Hexaplar  text,  and  frequently  from  the 
Peshito  version. 

The  version  made  by  Mar  Abbas,  who  died  A.  D.  552,  called  the  Kair- 
kuphensian  or  the  Karkaphensian,  and  used  by  the  Nestorians  who  live 
among  the  mountains ;  the  version  of  Thomas  of  Heraclea,  who  died 
A.  D  533 ;  and  that  of  the  Psalms  by  Simeon,  abbot  of  the  monastery  of 
St.  Licinius,  are  only  known  by  name.  Comp.  Bar  Hebraeus  or  Abul- 
faragius  in  Horreo  mysteriorum,  Assemani  Biblioth.  Orient.  T.  II.  p. 
283,  411—413.  T.  III.  P.  I.  p.  57.  ss.  T.  I.  p.  493,  612.  and  T.  II.  p.  83. 

§  53.     Arabic  Versions  from  the  Hebrew  text,  [a] 

The  following  Arabic  versions  have  been  made  from  the  He- 
brew text. 

I.  A  Version  or  Paraphrase  of  the  Pentateuch  and  Tsaiah,  by 
Saadias  Gaon,  a  native  of  Phithom,  a  city  of  the  province  of  I  hijum* 
in  Egypt,  who  taught  in  Babylonia,  and  died  in  942.  The  Penta- 
teuch has  been  published  in  Hebrew  characters  at  C  onslantinople  in 
1646,  and  in  Arabic  characters  in  the  London  and  Paris  Polyglots: 
Isaiah  was  published  at  Jena,  1790 — 91,  by  E.  G.  Paulus.  While 
delivering  lectures  on  this  version  I  have  observed  that  its  style  is 
not  pure,  and  have  since  found  tlie  same  observation  made  by  Simon, 
Hist.  Crit.  L.  II.  c.  xix.  Saadias  translated  also  Job  and  the  Psalms, 
as  Abulfaragius  informs  us  :  De  Sacy,  Chrestom.  Arab.  T.  11.  p. 
495.  s.  The  translation  of  Job  has  been  found  in  the  Bodleian 
library  in  England  ;  Cod.  Hunting.  511. 

II.  A  version  of  the  Pentateuch  was  published  by  Erpenius  at 
Leyden,  in  1662,  which  seems  to  have  been  made  by  an  African  Jew 
in  the  1 3th  century.     It  follows  the  Hebrew  text  very  closely. 

The  other  Arabic  versions  from  the  Hebrew  are  little  known.  A 
translation  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  Psalms,  and  Daniel,  made  by  Saadiafe 

*  [Now  called  Fayoum.    Tr.J 


72       GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO  THE   SACRED  BOOKS 

Ben  Levi  Askenoth,  in  the  first  half  of  the  17th  century,  which  adheres 
closely  to  the  Hebrew  text,  is  preserved  in  the  British  Museum,  Cod. 
No.  5503.  Comp.  Doederlein  in  Eichhorn,  Repert.  II.  Th  S.  153.  ff. 
A  translation  of  the  Psalms  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  marked  281  Pocoek, 
was  found  by  Schnurrer ;  and  he  has  published  Psalms  xvi.  xl.  and  ex.  in 
Hebrew  characters,  in  Eichhorns  Alig.  Biblioth.  HI.  Th.  S.  425—438. 
A  translation  of  the  Pentateuch  from  the  Hebrseo-Samaritan  text  by  Abu 
Said,  who  died  in  1257,  is  found  in  two  MSS.  in  the  Barberini  Library  at 
Rome,  in  two  MSS  in  the  National  Library  at  Paiis,  and  in  two  also  in 
the  Bodleian  Library  at  Oxford  Comp.  P^ULns  Commentat.  exhibens  e 
Biblioth.  Oxon.  Bodl  specimina  VII  versionum  Arab.  1789:  de  Sact  in 
Eichhorn,  Allg.  Biblioth.  X.  B.  S  1 — 176.,  and  iVIemoire  sur  la  ver- 
sion Arabe  de  livres  de  Moise  a  Pusage  des  Samaritains,  Paris,  1809. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  following  section,  see  Horhte, 
Vol.  II.  p.  !90.  Carpz.  p.  II.  Cap.  v.  §  3.  p.  640—664.  Eichh.  J  275 
—302.     Bauer,  §  87—91.    Simon,  L.  II.  c.  xvi.     TV.] 

§  54.     Mediate  Arabic  Versions. 

From  the  Syriac  Peshito :  1 )  an  Arabic  version  of  .Tob,  printed  in 
the  Paris  and  London  Polyglots  :  2)  a  version  of  the  Psalter,  printed 
in  1610,  in  the  monastery  of  S.  Anthony  in  the  diocese  of  Tripoh  in 
Syria  :  3)  another  version  of  the  Psalter  preserved  in  manuscript  in 
the  British  Museum,  No.  5469.  Comp.  Doederlein  in  Eichhorns 
Repert.  II.  Th.  S.  170.  ff. 

From  the  Alexandrine  version :  1 )  according  to  the  Hesychian  re- 
cension ;  the  Arabic  version  of  all  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
except  the  Pentateuch  and  Job,  printed  in  the  Paris  and  London 
Polyglots  :  2)  according  to  the  recension  of  Lucian;  the  Arabic  ver- 
sion of  the  Psalms  in  the  Octaplar  Psalter  of  Justinian,  pubhshed 
1616;  another  by  Gabriel  Sionita  and  Victor  Scialak,  published  at 
Rome,  in  4to,  1614  ;  and  a  version  of  the  seven  penitential  Psalms, 
published  at  Paris,  1679  :  3)  according  to  the  Melchite  recension;  a 
translation  of  the  Psalter  printed  first  at  Aleppo,  in  1706,  then  at 
Padua  in  1709,  and  often  since  in  Syria  :  it  is  found  also  in  a  manu- 
script in  the  National  Library  at  Paris,  extracts  of  which  have  been 
given  by  Stark,  in  his  Prolegomena  to  the  Psalter.  Comp.  Doe- 
©ERLEiN  in  Eichhorns  Rep.  II.  Th.  S.  175 — 181. 

The  Arabic  translation  of  the  Bible  published  for  the  use  of  the  Ori- 
ental Christians,  by  the  Propaganda  at  Rome,  in  1671,  and  reprinted  ip 

h 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  73 

175'2,  was  indeed  printed  from  four  MSS.  but  has  been  altered  from  the 
Vuljjate,  so  that  it  can  be  of  no  use  in  criticism.  The  edition  published 
by  Rutilius  without  mention  of  place,  and  not  completed,  was  taken 
from  this.  Comp.  Eichhorv's  Rep.  X.  Th.  S.  154—165.  Rosen- 
MFELLER,  Handbuch  fiir  die  Literatur  der  Bibl.  Krit.  und  Exeg. 
III.  Th.   S.  56—64. 

§  65.     Persian   Version.  [a\ 

Jacob  ben  Joseph,  a  native  of  Thus  in  Persia,  translated  the  Pen- 
tateuch from  the  Hebrew  into  Persian,  not  before  the  commence- 
ment of  the  9th  century  ;  for  in  Gen.  x.  10,  for  Babel  he  substitutes 
Bagdad,  which  city  was  founded  in  762.  Like  Aquila  he  is  exceed- 
ingly literal ;  he  retains  the  more  difficult  words  in  his  version,  and 
generally  agrees  with  Onkelos.  He  follows  our  masoretic  text.  This 
version  was  published  in  the  London  Polyglot,  from  the  Constantino- 
politan  edition  of  1646,  the  defects  of  which  were  indeed  supphed 
by  Hyde,  the  supplementary  parts  being  carefully  included  in  brack- 
ets.    Comp.  E.  F.  C.  RosENMUELLER  de  Versione  Persica,  181S. 

[a)  On  this  section,  Comp.  Horne  Vol.11,  pp.  191.  ?s.     De  Wettf 
Einleit.  §  68.     Eichh.  5  317,     Tr.] 

§  56.     Egyptian  Versions. [a] 

The  Old  Testament  was  translated,  probably  in  the  2d  or  3d 
century,  from  the  Alexandrine  version  into  the  modern  dialects  of 
Egypt,  which  arose  from  the  combination  of  the  ancient  Egyptian  lan- 
guage with  the  Greek  introduced  by  the  Ptolemies.  The  version? 
which  have  hitherto  become  known  to  us,  are  :  1 )  The  Coptic  version 
qfthe  Pentateuch,  published  from  three  MSS.  by  Wilkins,  at  London, 
in  1731  :  2)  A  Coptic  Psalter,  published  with  an  Arabic  translation, 
by  the  Propaganda  at  Rome,  in  1744  and  1749  :  3)  The  Memphite 
and  Sahidic  translation  of  the  ninth  chapter  of  Daniel  from  the  version 
of  Theodotion,  published  by  Minister,  in  1786,  at  Rome  :  and  4)  a 
portion  of  Jeremiah  from  c.  ix.  17.  to  c.  xiii.,  pul>lished  by  Minga- 
EELLi  in  his  Reliquia?  iEgyptiorum  codicum  in  Bibl.  Naniana  asserva- 
tae,  1785,  Bologna.  Other  books  lie  yet  unedited  in  libraries.  Comp. 
QrATREMERE   Recherches   sur  la  langue  et  literature  d'   Egyptr-. 

10 


74       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION    TO    THE    SACRED  BOOKS 

p.  116—140.  MicHAELis  Neue  Oriental.  Biblioth.  IV.  Th.  S.  74. 
if.  VII.  Th.  S.  25.  ff.  RosENMUELLER  Handb.  fiir  die  Lit.  der  krit. 
u.  Exeg.  III.  Th.  S.  74—77. 

[a)  Comp.  HoRNE  II.  192—195.  Eichh.  ^  312—316.  De  Wette 
Einleit.  §  51.     Tr.] 

§  57.     ^thiopic  Versi(m.[d] 

The  iEthiopic  or  Abyssinian  version  with  which  we  are  at  present 
acquainted  seems  to  be  the  same  wliich  is  mentioned  by  Chrysostom 
Horn.  II.  in  Joh.,  and  was  made  from  the  Alexandrine  version.  The 
following  parts  have  been  printed  :  1 )  The  Psalter  and  Canticles  in 
1613  at  Rome,  in  1518  at  Cologne,  and  in  the  London  Polyglot. 
The  Psalter  was  also  published  at  Frankfort  on  the  Maine  by  Lu- 
dolph,  in  1701,  and  Canticles  at  Leyden  by  Nissel  in  1656.  2)  The 
book  of  Jonah  and  the  first  four  chapters  of  Genesis,  by  Petraus,  at 
Leyden,  in  1660.  Jonah  was  also  published  at  Frankfort  on  the 
Maine  by  Staudrach  in  1706.  3)  Joel,  Ma^achi  and  Isaiah  Ivi.  1 — 
7.  by  Petraus  at  Leyden,  in  1661.  4)  Zephaniah  and  Ruth,  by 
Nissel,  at  Leyden  in  1660.  5)  Some  fragments,  by  C.  A.  Bode,  at 
Helmstadt,  in  1755,  and  by  Hasse  in  his  Lectionaria  Syro-Arabico- 

Samaritano-iEthiopica,  Regiomont.  1788, 8vo. The  version  of  the 

whole  Bible,  brought  by  Bruce  fiom  Abyssinia,  is  preserved  in  the 
British  Museum. 

[a)  Comp.  HoRisTE,  II.  192— 195.     Carpz.  P.  II.  C.  V.  H-    Eichh. 
5  309—311.     Tr.] 

§  58.     Armenian  Version.[a] 

The  Armenian  version  was  made  from  the  Alexandrine  version  by 
Miesrob,  the  inventor  of  the  Armenian  alphabet,  but  has  since  been 
altered  not  only  from  the  Syriac  Peshito,  but  also  from  the  Latin 
Vulgate.  That  this  was  not  done  by  king  Haithon  or  Haitho  in  the 
13th  century,  as  has  been  commonly  thought,  is  proved  by  the  Ar- 
menian Baghinanti  in  Alter's  Miscellany  1799,  p.  140.  ss.  It  was 
the  work  of  Yushkanor  Uskan  the  Armenian  bishop,  who  published  it 
in  1655  at  Amsterdam.     Comp.  Eichhobn  Bibliothek.  IV.  Th.  S. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  /.) 

623 — 652.     The  edition  published  at  Constantinople  in  1705  wa? 
collated  for  Holmes  by  Bredenkamp. 

[a)  See  Horne,  II.  196.      De  Wette,  §  52.      Eichh.    §   306— 
.^08.  TV.] 

0  59.     Slavonic  Versi(m.[a] 

In  the  9th  century  Cyril  of  Thessalonica,  the  inventor  of  the  Sla- 
vonic alphabet,  who  with  his  brother  Methodius  preached  the  gospel 
to  the  Bulgarians  and  Moravians,  translated  the  Alexandrine  version 
into  the  Slavonic  language.  The  first  edition,  at  least  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, appeared  at  Prague  in  1519,  and  that  of  all  the  books,  at 
Prague  in  1570.  The  first  edition  in  Russia  was  printed  at  Ostrog 
in  1581,  and  has  served  as  the  basis  of  all  others. 

[a)  Horne,  II.  196.    De  Wette,  }  54.    Eichh.  ^  318,  a.  For  an  ac- 
count of  the  Georgian  version,  see  J  318,  b.  and  De  Wette,  J  53.  TV.] 

§  60.     Latin  Versions  before  the  time  of  Jerome.  \a\ 

Augustin,  De  Doct.  Christ.  L.  II.  c.  11,  expressly  asserts  that  se- 
veral Latin  translations  of  the  Old  Testament  made  from  the  Alex- 
andrine version,  had  appeared  in  the  earlier  period  of  Christianity, 
and  he  adds,  c.  15,  that  the  Italic  (^Itald)  surpassed  the  others  in 
fidelity  and  perspicuity.  This  last  is  called  by  Jerome,  Comm.  in 
Jer.  xiv.  &l  xlix.  vulgataji,  the  vulgate,  and  communis,  the  common, 
and  by  Gregory  I.  Ep.  ad  Leandr.  vetus,  the  old,  translation. 

Sabatier,  in  his  Praefatio  ad  Bibliorum  versiones  Latinas  Antiquas, 
1743,  Rheims,  has  opposed  the  opinion  that  a  number  of  ancient  La- 
tin versions  existed.  But  without  efiect :  for  when  Augustin,  in  an 
epistle  to  Jerome  tells  him  that  he  would  confer  a  great  benefit  on 
the  church  '  by  adding  to  the  Latin  verity,  the  Scripture  as  translated 
by  the  seventy,'*  he  certainly  did  not  mean  by  '  Latin  verity'  one  ver- 
sion, but  the  Latin  Bible  ;  for  which  reason  he  immediately  adds, 
that  this  '  Latin  verity'  (or  Latin  Bible)  is  so  various  in  different  co- 
pies as  to  be  hardly  tolerable,  and  is  so  much  suspected  of  differing 

*  "  Si  earn  Scripturam  quam  septnaginta  interpretati  sunt,  Latinae  veritafi 
addiderit." 


76   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

from  the  Greek,  that  one  must  hesitate  to  make  quotations  from  it.'* 
Jerome  also,  in  his  preface  to  the  book  of  Joshua,  points  out  not  one 
version,  but  many,  when  he  says  that  there  are  among  the  Latins 
*  tot  exemplaria,  quot  codices,'  as  many  copies  as  there  are  manu- 
scripts, for  the  antithesis  between  '  exemplaria'  and  '  codices'  shows 
that '  exemplaria'  must  signify  different  versions  ;  and  when  he  adds, 
'  every  one  has  at  pleasure  added  or  omitted  according  to  his  own 
judgment,'!  he  only  points  out  another  source  of  variations,  in  addi- 
tion to  the  multiplicity  of  translations  already  mentioned  ;  just  as 
in  his  Preface  to  the  Gospels,  he  repeats  the  same  words  with  re- 
ference to  the  Latin  text  of  the  gospels,  in  which  case  there  can  be 
no  doubt  of  the  existence  of  several  versions. 

The  portions  of  the  bible  iu  tlie  Missals,  are  taken  from  the  ancient 
version  known  as  the  Vulgate,  the  common  translation,  or  the  Itala. 
Flaminius  NoEiLius  collected  many  other  fragments  of  the  same  version, 
and  from  them  composed  his  translation  of  the  Septuagint  after  the  Vati- 
can manuscript,  and  published  it  at  Rome  in  1588.  This  translation  is 
printed  in  the  London  Polyglot,  but  can  be  of  no  use  to  the  critic,  since 
Flaminius  selected  only  those  parts  of  the  ancient  version  which  agreed 
^vith  the  Septuagint  text,  and  supplied  the  rest  from  the  modern  Vulgate 
or  by  a  translation  of  his  own.  Nevertheless,  the  extracts  of  Nobilius 
from  the  fathers,  are  of  great  importance  in  the  criticism  of  the  Alexan- 
drine version.  The  ancient  Latin  version  of  the  Psalms,  is  given  in  the 
Psallerium  Quintuplex,  published  by  Faber  Stapflewsis,  in  1599,  at 
Paris,  and  afterwards  frequently  reprinted ;  and  in  the  Psalterium  Duplex, 
^ogether  with  the  songs  of  Moses,  Hezekiah,  the  three  children,  Zacha- 
'riah,  Simeon,  and  Mary,  according  to  the  Vulgate,  the  Septuagint,  and 
the  old  Latin  Itala,  in  the  second  part  of  the  Vindiciae  Canonic.  Script, 
Vulg.  Lat.  of  Blaw CHiNi,  1740,  Rome.  All  these  and  several  other  frag- 
ments are  collected  by  Sabatier  in  his  Bibliorum  Latinae  versiones  anti- 
quse,  published  at  Rheims,  in  1743,  in  3  vols,  folio. 

[a)  With  this  and  the  remaining  sections.  Compare  Horive  II.  pp.  196 
—202.  Carpz.  p.  II.  Cap.  vi,  Eichh.  §  319—337.  Bauer,  J  98, 
99,  p.  336—340.  Simon,  L.  II.  c.  xi— xiv.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  69 
—72.     Tr.] 

'^  '  In  diversis  codicibus  ita  variam  est,  ut  toleraii  vix  possit,  et  ita  suspectam  ue  in 
Graeco  aliud  inveniatur,  utinde  aliquid  proferri  dubitetur.' 

"  Unumquemque  pro  arbitrio  suo  vel  addiderit  vel  subtraxerit  quod  ei  visum  est.'' 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  V7 

§  61.     Emendation  of  the  Latin  version  by  Jerome. 

Jerome,  in  order  to  remedy  the  confusion  introduced  by  this  mul- 
tiplicity of  versions,  undertook  to  alter  the  common  vei-sion,  or  Italic, 
to  a  confuimity  with  the  Alexandrine.  This  he  did  at  first  in  a  hasty 
manner,  as  he  says,  Praef.  ad  Psalt.,  in  the  Psalter :  but  afterwards 
he  corrected  it  more  accurately  according  to  the  Hexaplar  text,  ad- 
tiing  also  the  obelisks  and  asterisks  used  in  that  edition.  The  first  of 
these  corrections  he  undertook  at  Rome,  the  other  in  Gaul  ;  and 
hence  the  Roman  and  Gallican  Psalters  have  descended.  Both 
have  been  pubhshed  by  Faber  Stapulensis  in  his  Psalterium  quintu- 
plex,  at  Paris,  in  1509  ;  and  by  Joseph  Maria  a  Caro  or  Thomasius, 
in  1683,  at  Rome.  Jerome  corrected  the  other  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  by  the  Hexaplar  text  in  a  similar  manner,  but  published 
only  those  to  which  we  have  his  double  prefaces  prefixed,  namely, 
Chronicles,  Ecclesiastes,  Canticles,  Proverbs,  and  Job  :  the  copy  of 
the  rest  he  lost,  as  he  writes  to  Augustin,  Ep.  64,  by  the  treachery  of 
some  individual. 

§  62.     Translation  of  Jerome. 

Before  the  completion  of  his  correction  of  the  old  version,  or 
ItaUc,  Jerome  began  to  translate  the  Hebrew  text  itself  into  La- 
tin, "  in  order  that  he  might  make  known  to  persons  acquainted 
only  with  the  Latin  language,  who  might  become  engaged  in  contro- 
versies with  the  Jews,  the  true  sense  of  the  Hebrew  text."  Hieron. 
ad  Sophron.  T.  L  Opp.  col.  836.,  ad  Augustin.  T.  IV.  0pp.  col.  627. 
Prsef.  in  Jes.  His  translations  of  the  several  books  were  made  in 
the  order  in  wliich  they  were  requested  of  him  by  his  friends  :  Praef. 
in  Paralip.,  in  Ezr.  et  Neh.,  and  in  Pentat.  He  did  not  invariably 
give  what  he  himself  behoved  to  be  the  best  translation  of  the  ori- 
ginal, but  occasionally,  as  he  confesses,  Praef.  ad  Com.  in  Eccles., 
and  Prjfif.  in  Pent.,  followed  the  Greek  translators,  although  he  was 
aware  that  they  had  often  erred  through  negligence,  because  he  was 
apprehensive  of  giving  umbrage  to  his  readers  by  too  wide  a  depart- 
ure from  the  established  version  :  and  therefore  we  find  that  in  his 
commentaries  he  sometimes  corrects  his  own  translation.  Some- 
times, too.  he  lias  substituted  a  worse  in  place  of  tjio  old  translation- 


V  8    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

Nevertheless,  he  far  surpassed  all  his  predecessors,  and  would  cer- 
tainly have  succeeded  still  better,  if  he  had  not  translated  with 
so  much  haste  :  Comp.  Hieron.  Praef.  in  Libros  Salora.,  and  Praef. 
in  Tobiam. 

§  63.     The  reception  which  the  Translation  of  Jerome  met  with. 

Tliis  version,  however  excellent,  found  adversaries  in  every  place, 
of  whom  Jerome  complains  in  almost  aU  his  prefaces,  and  in  many 
epistles.  Comp.  Augustin.  Ep.  10.  ad  Hieron.  Ruffin.  T.  IV. 
p.  424,  448,  450.  Hieron.  Pra;f  I.  et  H.  in  Job,  in  Ezr.  et  Neh.. 
and  Apolog.  H.  Posterity,  with  a  more  equitable  judgment,  ap- 
proved of  the  version,  and  in  time  introduced  it  into  all  the  Latin 
churches,  so  that  as  early  as  the  close  of  the  6th  century  it  pre- 
vailed, and  in  the  7th  century  was  the  only  one  in  public  use. 
Comp.  Gregor.  Mag,  Prsf.  ad  Moral,  in  Job,  and  Isidor.  L.  I. 
offic.   12. 

§  64.     History  of  the  Version  of  Jerome. 

The  universal  admission  of  this  version  throughout  the  vast  extent 
of  the  Latin  church  multiphed  the  copies  of  it ;  in  the  transcription 
of  which  it  became  corrupted  with  many  errors  :  and  there  were 
some  who  introduced  erroneous  alterations  from  the  old  Italic,  or 
took  the  hberty  of  adding  passages  from  the  liturgical  books,  and 
even  from  Flavins  Josephus.  Examples  of  this  are  adduced,  not 
only  by  Martianay  in  his  remarks  on  the  books  of  Kings  and  Pro- 
verbs in  the  Divina  Bibliotheca  of  Jerome,  but  also  in  the  Correc- 

toria  Bibliorum. Toward  the  close  of  the   8th  or  beginning  of 

the  9th  century,  it  was,  at  the  command  of  Charlemagne,  corrected 
by  Alcuin  e  vetustioribus  ac  verioribus  fontibus,  that  is,  as  Hody,  De 
textibus  Bibliorum  originaUbus,  p.  407,  410,  has  discovered,  from 
the  Hebrew  text.  This  recension  was  either  not  widely  propagated, 
or  was  again  infected  with  errors  ;  for  which  reason  Lanfranc,  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  who  died  A.  1089,  caused  some  copies  to  be 
again  corrected.  Nevertheless  about  the  middle  of  the  12th  cen- 
tury. Cardinal  Nicholas  found  tot  exemplaria  quot  codices,  as  man} 
copies  as  manuscripts,  and  therefore  prepared  a  corrected  edition 


OP  \he  old  testament.  79 

About  this  time  the  Parisian  theologians  began  their  S'Tavopflwrv),  or 
Correctorium  Parisiense  seu  Sorbonicum.  This  was  followed  by  the 
Correctorium  of  Hugo  a  S.  Caro,  which  was  continued  by  the  Domi- 
nicans from  the  year  1240.  They  published  two  Correctoria  of  small 
value,  which  are  slightingly  noticed  by  Roger  Bacon  in  an  epistle 
written  to  Pope  Clement  IV.  between  1264  and  1268.  In  these  cri- 
tical works  we  meet  with  many  more  various  readings  than  are  found 
in  later  copies  of  this  version  ;  hence  it  appears  that  they  at  least 
produced  the  effect  of  preventing  the  transcribers  from  taking  such 
gross  hberties,  and  of  causing  them  to  transcribe  with  greater  care. 
Comp.  Simon.  Hist.  Crit.  du  Nouv.  Test.  T.  II.  p.  114.  ss.  Hody, 
de  Text.  Bibl.  Orig.  p.  420,  429.  ss.  Correctorium  Bibliae,  per 
Jac.  Gaudensem,  1500,  Colon.  4to.  ;  and  Doederlein,  in  Litera- 
rischen  Museum,  Altdorf,  1777,  1778.  I.  B.  I.  St.  S.  14.  ff.  II.  St. 
S.  197.  ff. 

§  65.     Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  concerning  the  Version 
of  Jerome. 

This  version,  then  known  under  the  name  of  the  Vulgate,  being 
banished  from  the  churches  in  the  16th  centui?y  by  the  Protestants, 
the  Council  of  Trent  in  its  4th  session  published  the  following  de- 
cree :  "  The  same  holy  council,  considering  that  it  may  be  of  no 
small  utility  to  the  church  of  Gor,  to  point  out  which  among  all  the 
Latin  editions  of  the  sacred  books  tJiat  are  spread  abroad,  ought  to 
be  esteemed  authentic ;  declares  and  ordains,  that  the  same  old  and 
Vulgate  edition,  which  has  been  approved  by  the  church  by  the  long 
use  of  it  during  so  many  centuries,  is  to  be  esteemed  authentic  in 
public  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  in  disputes,  in  preaching  and  in  ex- 
pounding, and  that  no  one  shall  dare  to  reject  it  under  any  pretext 
whatsoever."*     This  decree,  although  in  itself  plain,  has  yet  given 

*  "  Insuper  eadem  sacrosancta  S3modus  considerans  non  parum  utilitatis  acce- 
dere  posse  ecclesiae  Dei,  si  ex  omnibus  Latinis  editionibus,  quae  circumferuntur, 
sacrorutn  libroram,  quainam  pro  authentica  sit  habenda,  innotesicat  ;  statuit  et  de- 
clarat,  ut  hae.c  ipsa  vetus  et  vulgata  editio,  quae  longo  tot  seculorum  usu  in  ipsa 
ecclesia  probata  est,  in  pubiicis  lecHonibus,  disputationibus,  praedicationibus  et 
expoaitionibus  pro  authentica  habeatur,  et  nemo  illam  rejicere  quovis  praetextu 
andeat."  [Cone.  Trid.  cum  declarat.  &c.,  recog.  J.  Gallemart,  Col.  A^.  1722, 
p.  9.     Tr.} 


HO        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

rise  to  controversies  of  no  small  importance,  some  contending  that 
by  it  the  Hebrew  text  is  rejected,  while  others  of  more  learning 
assert  the  contrary.  And  with  propriety  :  for,  1 )  The  Council 
speaks  only  of  the  Latin  editions  which  were  at  tliat  time  spread 
abroad,  nor  does  it  make  any  mention  of  the  original  sources,  as 
Bellarminc  has  already  observed,  and  Salmero  (Proleg.  3.),  and 
Vega  (L.  XX.   c.  2.)  who  was,  with  Bellarmine,  present  at  the 

Council,  expressly  testify. 2)  The  Council  declares  the  Vulgate 

version  to  be  autlientic  in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  word  is  used 
by  lawyers,  who  call  a  document,  whether  it  be  a  transcript,  or  a 
translation  into  another  language,  authentic,  when  it  is  free  from  any 
important  error  relating  to  the  substance  of  the  affair,  and  is  there- 
fore worthy  of  credit ;  nor  do  errors  of  lesser  moment  prevent  a 
document  from  being  called  authentic.  That  the  Council  is  to  be 
understood  in  this  sense,  has  been  declared,  as  Andradius  mentions. 
Defens.  p.  361,  by  Cardinal  a  S.  Cruce,  Papal  legate  in  the  Council, 
and  afterwards  Pope  under  the  name  of  Marcellus  II.  This  has 
also  been  acknowledged  by  Pius  IV,  and  V.,  Sixtus  V.,  Gregory  XIV.. 
and  Clement  VIII.,  who  took  pains  to  have  corrected  editions  of  this 
version  published.  The  more  learned  Cathohcs  have  never  denied 
the  existence  of  errors  in  the  Vulgate  ;  on  the  contrary,  Isidore 

Clarius  collected  80,000. 3)  The  Council  did  indeed  decree  that 

this  version  should  be  used  in  all  public  reading  of  the  Scriptures^ 
disputes,  preaching,  and  expounding,  and  that  no  one  should  dare  to 
reject  it  under  any  pretext  whatsoever ;  but  this  is  to  be  taken  with 
reference  to  what  precedes  it,  as  it  has  always  been  understood  by 
all  learned  Catholics,  namely,  as  forbidding  that  any  of  the  other  La- 
tin versions  irhich  xoere  in  common  use,  should  be  substituted  foi-  the 
Vulgate.  So  the  Greek  Cathohcs  use  the  Alexandrine  version  ;  the 
Syrians,  the  Syriac  ;  and  those  who  speak  Arabic,  the  Arabic ;  and 
the  learned  Latin  Catholics,  at  every  period  since  the  Council,  havf 
used  the  original  text,  being  of  opinion  that  the  decree  of  the  Coun- 
cil relates  only  to  those  who  are  ignorant  of  the  original  languages 
Comp.  Du  Pin,  Diss.  Prel.  L,  T,  c.  vii.  §  3.  p.  204—209.  [On  the 
Canon,  pp.  197—203.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  81 

^66.     Cojrection  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  Council  of  Trent  in  its  Session  IV.  commanded  that  tliis  ver- 
sion should  be  printed  as  correctly  as  possible.  As  early  as  the  be- 
ginning of  the  16th  century,  Adrian  GummeUi,  Albert  Castellan, 
and  the  editors  of  the  Complutensian  Polyglot,  had  given  corrected 
editions,  and  Robert  Stephens  not  only  printed,  in  1623,  the  Vulgate 
corrected  from  ancient  MSS.,  but  also,  in  1540,  pubhshed  an  edition 
with  the  various  readings  of  three  editions  and  fourteen  MSS.  This 
again  was  compared  by  Hentenius  with  many  other  MSS.  and  edi- 
tions, and  he  added  the  various  readings  to  an  edition  published  at 
Louvain,  in  1547.  This  edition  was  frequently  reprinted,  and  was 
published  at  Antwerp  in  1580,  and  again  in  1585,  enriched  with 
many  more  various  readings,  obtained  from  a  new  collation  of  MSS. 

by  the  divines  of  Louvain. In  the  meantime  Pius  IV.  ordered 

some  Roman  theologians  to  collect  the  most  ancient  MSS.  from 
every  quarter,  and  collate  them  ;  this  collation  was  continued  under 
Pius  v.,  who  in  addition,  caused  the  original  text  to  be  consulted. 
Under  Gregory  XIII.  the  work  was  at  a  stand,  but  was  resumed  and 
completed  under  the  auspices  of  Sixtus  V.     This  edition  appeared  in 
1 590,  and  its  use  was  enjoined  upon  the  whole  Latin  church  by  a  con- 
stitution of  perpetual  obhgation,  {ccmstitutio  pei'petuo  valitura,)  while 
at  the  same  time  the  future  publication  of  the  Vulgate  with  various 
readings  was  prohibited,  whereby  the  critical  examination  of  this  im- 
portant version  would  be  obstructed.    Sixtus  V.  dying  soon  aftei-,  his 
edition  was  found  to  abound  in  errors,  and  under  Gregory  XIV.  it 
was  corrected  in  nearly  2000  places  from  MSS.,  citations  of  the  Fa- 
thers, and  even  from  the  original  texts  ;  yet  most  of  the  corrections 
were  derived  from  the  Louvain  edition.     This  new  edition,  in  the 
preface  of  which  the  errors  of  the  Sixtine  are  imputed  to  the  prin- 
ter, appeared  under  Clement  VIII.,  in  1 592,  and  has  been  followed  by 
every  other  which  has  since  been  published.     It  appears  from  the 
preface  that  the  correction  was  conducted  according  to  the  rules  of 
criticism,  except  in  this  one  respect,  that  some  passages  have  been 
altered  from  the  original  text,  whereas  the  only  question  should  have 
been,  how  Jerome  translated  it,  and  this  should  have  been  deter- 
mined from  ancient  copies  of  his  version.    Nevertheless  it  is  certain, 

11 


82   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

that  many  places  differing  from  the  original  text?  were  purposely  left 
unaltered,  and  werei  for  this  reason  objected  to  by  many  learned  men     j 
of  the  age,  who  were  ignorant  of  the  rules  of  sound  criticism.  i 

§  67.     What  version  does  the  Latin  Vulgate  exhibit  ? 

From  what  has  been  hitherto  said,  it  may  be  concluded  that  the 
Vulgate  ic5  tlic  version  of  Jerome,  and  that  there  was  no  reason  why 
this  should  have  been  doubted  m  the  16th  century.  ,It  remains  to 
observe,  however,  1)  that  the  Vulgate  is  not  a  pure  copy  of  Je- 
rome's version  ;  for  all  its  faults  have  not  been  corrected,  nor  indeed 
could  they  be  corrected  by  the  methods  which  have  been  pursued  :  j 
the  version  of  Jerome  is  given  in  a  purer  state  in  the  Divina  Biblio- 
theca  Hieronymi,  published  by  Martianay,  at  Paris,  1693,  in  folio. 
2)  Some  books  in  the  Vulgate  are  not  of  the  version  of  Jerome  ;  j 
namely,  a)  the  Psalter,  which  is  in  the  old  common  Latin  version,  or 
Italic ;  some,  however,  think  that  it  is  the  Gallican  Psalter,  with 
the  obelisks  and  asterisks  omitted  :  b)  Baruch,  Ecclesiasticus,  Wis- 
dom, and  the  two  books  of  Maccabees,  are  preserved  in  the  old 
Latin  version. 

The  first  editions  of  the  Vulgate  name  neither  the  year  nor  the  place 
of  their  impression  :  the  first  editions  containing  these  are,  in  Germany, 
that  of  Mayentz,  1462  :  in  Italy,  that  of  Rome,  in  1471,  that  of  Naples, 
in  1476,  and  that  of  Venice,  in  1475  and  1476. 


'^P    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  S3 


CHAPTER  IV. 


RESPECTING  THE  LANGUAGE    OF   THE    BOOKS   OP  THE   OLD  TESTAMENT. 
AND    THE   HELPS   TO   UNDERSTAND   IT. 


§  68.     The  language  of  the  Old  Testament,  [a] 

The  Hebrew  language,  in  which  the  protocanonical  books,  with  the 
exception  of  some  portions  in  Chaldee,  (Dan.  ii.  4 — vii.  28.  Ezr.  iv. 
8 — vi.  19.  vii.  11—27  and  Jer.  x.  xi.)  are  written,  is  a  dialect  of  the 
Shemites,  but  little,  however,  or  not  at  all  different  from  that  of  the 
descendants  of  Ham  in  Palestine  or  Phcenicia,  that  is  to  say,  the 
Canaanites.  This  is  shown  from  what  remains  of  Punic  or  Phoenician 
in  Africa  (See  Plaut.  Comed.  T.  HI.  Psnul.  p.  73—81,  Ed.  Berol. 
1807—1811  ;  BocHART  in  Canaan,  L.  H.  cap.  1 — 7;  or  rather 
Bellerman  Versuch  einer  Erklarung  der  Punischen  Stellen  in 
Paenulus  des  Plautus  1806 — 7.),  and  is  confirmed  by  m*any  places  of 
Augustm*  and  Jerome. t  On  this  account  the  Hebrew  langviage  is 
called  in  Isa.  xix.  18.  the  language  of  Canaan  ;  from  which  it  would 
seem,  that  Abraham,  a  descendant  of  Shem,  coming  from  Ur  of  the 
Chaldees  into  Palestine,  adopted  the  Canaanitish  dialect,  which  dif- 
fered but  little  from  liis  own,  and  transmitted  it  to  his  posterity.  In 
Isa.  xxxvi.  11.  II  Kings  xviii.  26.  II  Chron.  xxxii.  18.,  it  is  called 
the  Jewish,  because  at  that  time  the  use  of  it  was  almost  exclusively 
confined  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  The  name  of  Hebrew  is  never 
applied  to  it  in  the  Bible,  but  is  used  in  the  New  Testament,  as  also 
in  Philo  and  Josephus,  for  the  Aramfean,  (John  v.  2,  xix.  13.  Act. 
xxi.  40.  xxii.  2.  xxvi.  14.),  because  at  that  time  this  was  the  vema- 

*  [In  Lib.  Judic.  L.  VII.  cap.  xvi. — Cont.  Lit.  Petilian.  L.  II.  cap.  civ.— In  Jola, 
Tract.  15.— De  Verb.  Dom.  Serm.  35.] 

t  [Comm.  in  Jer.  L.  V.  Cap.  xxv.— Comm.  in  Jes.  L.  III.  cap.  vii.  L.  VIII. 
cap.  xix.l 


B4        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  ROOKb 

cular  language  of  the  Hebrews.  In  like  manner  the  language  of  the 
Old  Testament,  is  now  called  Hebrew,  because  it  was  anciently  the 
vernacular  tongue  of  that  people. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  following  sections,  comp.  Eichh.  5  10- 
11.  Gesenios,  Geschichte  der  Heb.  Spr.  und.  Schrift  §  4—27.   Tr. ) 

§  69.     History. of  the  Hebrew  Language. 

This  language  was  very  extensively  propagated  in  ancient  times  by 
the  Phoenicians,  who  possessed  marts  and  colonies  in  many  parts  of 
Asia,  and  in  almost  all  the  coasts  of  Africa  and  Europe.  See 
BocHARTi  Canaan,  L.  I.  de  Phoenicum  coloniis.  It  was  understood 
also  by  the  inhabitants  of  Babylonia,  Mesopotamia,  Assyria,  Arabia, 
and  Ethiopia,  although  other  Shemitish  dialects  differing  very  httle 
from  the  Hebrew  we  e  spoken  by  them.  This  language,  therefore, 
cannot  be  said  to  have  been  restricted  to  a  corner  of  the  earth,  and  to 
have  been  inaccessible  to  the  people  of  all  other  countries.  On  the 
contrary,  the  designation  used  for  very  remote  nations  is,  that  the  He- 
brews do  not  understand  their  language  ;  Deut.  xxviii.  49.    Jer.  v.  15. 

Twenty -two  hundred  years  before  Christ,  the  Hebrew  tongue  was 
so  far  cultivated  as  to  have  become  a  written  language.  This  is  clear 
from  the  document  in  Gen.  xxiii.,  written  in  the  age  of  Abraham.  It 
•is  therefore  not  at  all  surprising  that  1600  years  B.  C.  the  Canaan- 
ites  had  their  13D  nnp,  Kirjath  Sepher,  that  is,  city  of  books,  Jud.  i. 

11,  12.  Jos.  XV.  15,  49.  The  poetical  pieces  of  the  age  of  Moses, 
which  are  contained  in  Ex.  xv.  Deut.  xxxii.  xxxiii.  Num.  xxi.  18, 28 — 
30.  xxiii.  1—10,  18—24.  xxiv.  4—9,  16—24.,  show  that  this  was  the, 
golden  age  of  the  language.  That  it  was  not  altogether  neglected  in 
the  time  of  the  judges  is  proved  by  the  poems  referred  to  in  Jos.  x. 
13.  s,,  by  the  song  of  Deborah  in  Jud.  v.,  and  by  the  fable  of  Jothami 
in  ix.  7 — 20.  In  the  time  of  David  it  was  in  a  very  flourishing  state, ' 
and  the  interval  between  his  reign  and  that  of  Hezekiah  may  be  called 
its  silver  age,  towards  the  close  of  which  however  some  foreign  words, 
principally  Aramaean,  were  introduced  by  the  increasing  intercourse^ 
with  the  Assyrians  and  Babylonians.  This  happened  at  an  earlie; 
period  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  upon  the  overthrow  of  which  t.h( 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  b5 

citizens  who  remained,  coalescing  with  the  colonrsts  who  had  been 
introduced  among  them,  mingled  the  Hebrew  with  the  Aramaean, 
and  thus  gave  rise  to  the  Samaritan  dialect. — From  the  time  of  Heze- 
kiah  to  the  Babylonish  captivity,  the  purity  of  the  language  was  still 
more  neglected  and  it  was  deformed  by  very  many  foreign  terms  ;  so 
that  this  may  be  called  its  iron  age. — The  Hebrews  when  carried  into 
captivity,  forgetting  their  ancient  tongue,  adopted  the  Aramaean,  the 
vernacular  language  of  the  places  in  which  they  dwelt ;  so  that  subse- 
quently, upon  their  return,  some  spoke  Chaldee,  and  others  Syriac. 
The  former  settled  in  Judea,  the  latter  in  Galilee.  Among  the  culti- 
vated part  of  the  people  the  old  language  continued  in  use  during 
some  time,  and  in  it  the  writers  composed  their  works,  until  at  last  it 
became  totally  extinct.  This  last  period  may  be  styled  its  leaden  age. 
The  learned,  those  especially  who  explained  the  law  to  the  people 
in  the  synagogues,  still  preserved  some  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew 
language,  which  was  acquired  and  propagated  in  the  schools  to  such 
an  extent  as  to  be  written  and  spoken,  but  by  no  means  in  purity  :  for 
its  deficiency  in  words  was  suppUed  from  the  Aramaean  and  Persian, 
and  after  some  time  from  the  Greek  and  Latin  also.  In  this  way  very 
similar  to  that  by  which  the  scholastic  Latin  of  the  middle  ages  was 
produced,  arose  the  modern  Hebrew,  which  we  meet  with  in  the  Tal- 
mud. That  it  had  been  completely  formed  before  the  time  of  Christ 
and  his  apostles,  is  certain  from  many  places  of  the  New  Testament. 
This  dialect  is  called  the  Talmudic.  In  a  more  recent  age  it  was 
further  altered  by  new  changes  and  foreign  words,  and  this  is'\vhat  is 
styled  the  Rabbinic. 

§  70.     Loss  of  the  Hebrew  Language. 

The  language  of  the  ancient  Hebrews  has  not  indeed  entirely  pe- 
rished, like  those  of  so  many  other  ancient  nations,  yet  on  the  other 
hand  its  fate  has  not  been  so  favourable  as  that  of  the  Greek  and 
Latin,  which  are  not  only  extant  in  a  great  number  of  books  but  have 
also  preserved  versions,  lexicons,  and  scholiasts,  from  the  very  time  that 
they  were  living  languages  ;  so  that  abundant  testimonies  can  be  ad- 
duced from  those  sources  in  relation  to  their  respective  usages.  In 
the  Hebrew  all  that  remains  is  contained  in  a  few  small  works,  which 
scarcely  comprehend  two-thirds  of  the  language.     Very  many  words. 


86   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

significations  of  words,  and  phrases,  are  lost ;  and  what  remain'  are 
destitute  of  any  competent  witness,  such  as  a  lexicographer,  expositor, 
or  schoUast  of  the  age  when  the  language  was  vernacular.  Comp. 
ScHTLTENs  de  defectibus  ling.  Heh.  in  his  Orig.  Heb.,  Lug.  Bat  1761, 
4to  p.  314—436. 

§71.     Difficulty  of  the  Hebrew  Language. 

From  the  circumstances  which  have  been  stated  arises  the  difficulty 
of  the  Hebrew  language.  For  since  the  significations  which  any 
people  may  affix  to  sounds  or  words,  and  the  sense  which  they  may 
attach  to  sentences,  is  a  historic  fact  which  can  be  known  only  by 
those  who  use  their  language  as  vernacular,  or  by  such  as  have  been 
instructed  by  those  to  whom  it  was  vernacular  ;  the  significations  of 
words  and  the  sense  of  expressions  of  any  dead  language,  and  conse- 
quently of  the  Hebrew,  ought  to  be  attested  by  witnesses  of  this  de- 
scription. But  the  Hebrew  usage  is  quite  destitute  of  evidence  of 
this  kind.  The  most  ancient  interpreters,  the  Alexandrine,  lived 
two  centuries  after  the  language  had  ceased  to  be  a  living  one  ;  all  , 
the  others  were  many  centuries  more  modern.  They  are  not  there-  1 
fore  competent  witnesses,  and  this  is  moreover  proved  by  their  fre- 
quent discrepancies  and  manifest  errors. 

i 
§  72.     Knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  Language  in  Jewish  and  Christian 

Schools. 

The  Jewish  teachers  have  indeed  preserved  a  knowledge  of  the 
Hebrew  language  in  their  schools ;  but  as  witnesses  of  its  ancient 
usage  they  became  necessarily  the  more  incompetent  in  proportion  as 
the  times  in  which  they  flourished  were  remote  from  the  fact  which 
they  were  to  certify.  Besides,  they  are  very  far  from  being  unani- 
mous in  their  decisions,  or  consistent  with  themselves,  and  they  be- 
tray their  ignorance  by  many  glaring  errors. 

These  guides  whose  fideUty  could  so  little  be  trusted  were  followed 
by  Christians,  until  in  the  17th  century  some  Protestants  became 
doubtful  respecting  this  authority  of  the  Rabbles,  and  sought  for  prin- 
ciples more  to  be  relied  on,  by  the  aid  of  wliich  the  Hebrew  language 
might  be  learned.  But  Bohl,  Gossuet,  NEiii>L\ivN,  Ruemelin, 
FoRSTER,  AvENAR.  LcEscHER.  and  somc  others,  wandered  into  sCich 


r 

OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  87 

dangerous  by-paths,  that  it  would  have  been  much  better  not  to  leave 
the  beaten  road.  In  this  century  however  John  Ernest  Gerhard, 
(1647,)  Andr.  Sennert,  (1658,)  Hottinger,  (1649  and  1659,) 
ScHiNDLER,  (1663,)  Castell,  (in  liis  Lexicon  Heptaglotton  (1669,) 
John  F.  Nicolai,  (1670,)  John  Wm.  Hillinger,  (1670,)  John  Le 
Clerc,  and  Pocock,  did  indeed  recommend  the  cognate  dialects,  and 
Loms  DE  DiEU  (1642,)  in  his  Animadversiones  in  Libros  V.  F.,  the 
ancient  versions,  as  means  of  illustrating  the  Hebrew.  But  vei7  little 
benefit  resulted,  until  in  the  beginning  of  the  18th  century,  Albert 
ScHULTENs,  who  was  prepared  for  the  undertaking  by  the  most  ex- 
tensive erudition,  showed,  with  immense  labour,  in  his  Origines  He- 
braictB,  in  opposition  to  Driessen,  that  it  was  only  through  the  cognate 
dialects  that  a  certain  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  could  be 
drawn.  When  however  Schultens  and  his  followers  ran  to  extremes 
in  seeking  assistance  from  etymology,  and  neglected  the  Aramaean 
dialects  and  the  ancient  versions,  John  David  Michaelis,  in  his 
Beurtheilung  der  Mittel  welche  man  anwendet  die  Hebraische 
Sprache  zu  verstehen,  1754,  marked  out  with  greater  care  the  princi- 
ples of  the  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testament.  Comp.  Meyers 
Gesch.  der  Schrifter.  klar.  HI.  58— 77. [a] 

[a)  See  Germ.  Introd.  p.  254,  255.     Tr.] 

§  73.     Knowledge    of  the   Hebrew   Language  which    may  he    de- 
pended on. 

Since,  as  has  been  shown,  direct  testimony  respecting  the  usage  of 
the  Hebrew  language,  (that  is,  such  as  arises  from  the  Hebrews  them- 
selves of  the  age  when  their  language  was  hving,)  cannot  be  attained, 
it  becomes  necessary  to  resort  to  indirect.  This  is  afforded  by  the 
cognate  dialects,  which  in  fact  are  at  bottom  the  same  as  the  Hebrew 
language,  so  that  the  signification  of  words  and  the  sense  of  phrases 
and  sentences  which  we  find  in  them,  should  be  admitted  also  in  the 
Hebrew,  particularly  if  these  are  supported  by  the  connexion  of  the 
discourse,  the  subject,  and  the  scope  of  the  author.  That  the  Chaldee- 
Syriac,  Arabic,  Ethiopic  or  Abyssinian,  Samaritan,  Phcenician  and 
Talraudic  dialects  are  the  same  language  as  the  Hebrew,  any  one  who 
is  acquainted  with  them  will  discover :  for  in  all  there  are  the  samf 


88   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

roots,  the  same  derivations,  the  same  method  of  formation,  the  same 
forms  of  words,  the  same  significations,  the  same  grammatical  inflec- 
tions with  but  httle  variation,  and  the  same  phrases.  Those  who  are 
unacquainted  with  them  may  be  taught  the  fact  by  the  history  itself, 
(Comp.  Gen.  x.  16 — 30.  xii.  1,  ss.  xxix.  3  ss.  xxxvii.  27.  28.  Ex. 
iv.  18.  Jud.  vii.  13 — 15.,)  which  shows  that  Aramceans,  Arabs  and 
Hebrews  conversed  with  each  other  freely  without  an  interpreter. 
And  if  it  appears  from  H  Kings  xviii.  26.  Isa.  xxxvi.  11.  that  the 
common  people  of  the  Jews  did  not  understand  the  Aramaean  dialect, 
still  the  nobles  who  were  better  versed  in  the  Hebrew  understood  it ; 
and  certainly  without  having  learned  it,  for  in  that  age  the  acquisition 
of  foreign  languages  was  confined  to  merchants.  The  Ethiopic  or 
Abyssinian  dialect  is  the  Arabic,  which  the  Cushites  brought  with 
them  into  Africa  across  the  straits  of  Babelmandel,  and  slightly  altered. 
The  Sa7naritan,  which  consists  of  a  mixture  of  the  Hebrew  and 
Aramaean,  cannot  be  radically  different  from  either.  The  Talmudic 
is  the  Hebrew  itself  a  little  altered,  and  increased  by  the  addition  of 
foreign  and  more  modern  words  and  phrases. 

§  74.     Diversity  in  the  Dialects. 

That  the  dialects  differ  in  some  respects  is  what  the  nature  of  the 
case  might  lead  us  to  anticipate.  But  this  discrepancy  does  not  alter 
the  nature  and  substance  of  the  language.  1)  It  affects  the  different 
position  of  the  accented  syllable,  which  in  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee 

is  usually  the  last,  in  the  Syriac  and  Arabic  the  penult. 2)  The 

different  auxihary  or  vocal  sounds,  as  for  example,  :3lp  (to  be  near,) 

in  Hebrew  and  Arabic,  3"ip  in  Aramsean.     And  in  general  when  the 

Hebrew  and  Chaldee  have  the  i,  the  Syriac  usually  employs  an  e,  and 
where  e  occurs  in  the  Hebrew,  the  Syriac  frequently  has  i.  For  the 
Hebrew  cholem  the  Chaldee  has  Jcametz ;  and  its  forms  in  Segol  are 
in  the  Aramaean  and  Chaldee  generally  words  of  one  syllable  ;  as 
Heb.  Sjn,  Aram.  Sji,  Arab.  Sjl. 3)  The  change  of  some  pz-inci- 

pal  sounds  or  consonants,  such  especially  as  are  of  the  same  organ 
of  speech.  Thus  for  the  Hebrew  Sin  the  Arabic  generally  has  Shin. 
and  the  contraiy  ;  and  when  the  Hebrew  Shin  is  altered  in  Aram^an 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMKNT.  89 

to  Thttu,  ilie  Arabic  has  The,  as  Heb.  Spcy,  Aram.  '?pn,  Arab.  Spn  ; 

and  when  for  the  Heb.  Zain  the  AramEeau  uses  Daleth,  the  Arabic 
has  Dsal,  as  Heb.  n3T,  Aram.  n3T,  Arab.  n3T.    The  Hebrew  Tzade 

is  changed  in  Aramasan  into  Tet,  for  which  in  Arabic  tiiere  is  usually 
a  Da,  as  in  Heb.  -JV,  Aram,  xolj,  Arab.  '3b. 4)  The  form  of 

the  words  is  often  somewhat  different  while  the  signification  is  the 
same  ;  as  in  the  flexion  of  verbs  and  nouns,  in  the  vowel  changes  of 
nouns  with  suffixes,  in  the  plural  number,  and  in  the  construct  state, 
and  also  in  the  forms  of  nouns  ;  and  sometimes  a  letter  is  omitted  or 

added. 5)  The  signification  of  words  is  often  in  one  dialect  more 

limited,  and  in  another  more  comprehensive  ;    in  one  specific,  in 

another  general. 6)  Many  words,  significations,  and  modes  of 

speech,  are  in  one  dialect  very  current,  while  in  another  they  are 

used  but  seldom. 7)  In  difterent  dialects  slight  changes  only  of 

signification  take  place  ;  as  for  instance,  some  verbs  which  in  He- 
brew are  intransitive,  are  in  the  other  dialects  transitive.— 8)  The 

most  remarkable  variety  is  caused  by  the  provinciahsms,  that  is  to 
say,  the  words,  significations,  and  phrases,  which  are  pecuhar  to  any 
dialect.  Since  the  Hebrew  provincialisms  cannot  be  explained  from 
the  cognate  dialects,  and  those  of  the  cognate  dialects  cannot  be 
applied  to  the  explanation  of  the  Hebrew,  the  interpreter  must  con- 
sequently be  on  his  guard  ;  but  as  cases  of  this  kind  are  not  very 
frequent,  this  cannot  weaken  the  testimony  of  the  dialects  in  ascer- 
taining the  Hebrew  usage.  Care  must  be  taken  not  to  introduce 
into  the  Hebrew,  through  a  slight  similarity  of  words,  ideas,  and 
phrases,  what  properly  belongs  to  one  or  another  of  the  dialects. 
Nevertheless  even  Hebrew  provincialisms  often  receive  light  from 
the  cognate  dialects. 

§  75.     The  dialects  not  changed  in  their  general  character. 

The  cognate  dialects  are  indeed  derived  from  books  somewhat 
modern,  which  were  written  many  ages  after  the  Hebrew  had  be- 
come a  dead  language.  Still  there  is  no  reason  to  appreliend  that 
they  have  been  greatly  changed,  so  as  to  present  to  us  a  very  difter- 
ent appearance  from  what  they  formerly  exhibited.     For  (liese  tlj-i- 


90         GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

lects,  as  well  as  the  Hebrew,  were  highly  cultivated  in  very  early 
ages  ;  and  languages  which  have  arrived  at  such  a  state  of  perfec- 
tion, by  this  very  perfection  of  theirs  become  fixed,  so  that  they  are 
not  subjected  to  mutations,  unless  of  an  unimportant  nature,  and 
such  as  do  not  affect  their  internal  character.  This  is  especially  the 
case  with  eastern  languages.  In  order  to  illustrate  what  has  been 
said,  1)  the  Punic  in  the  Psenulus  of  Plautus  may  be  given  as  an 
example,  which,  notwithstanding  the  injury  which  it  has  sustained 
from  ignorant  transcribers,  manifestly  corresponds  with  Hebrew. 
2)  The  Hebrew  of  Nehemiah,  Malachi,  Ezra,  Haggai,  and  Zecha- 
riah,  agrees  in  the  main  with  the  language  of  Moses,  who  was  more 
than  1000  years  anterior  to  them.  3)  The  Syriac  dialect  of  the 
second  century  in  the  Peshito  version  is  the  same  as  is  read  in  Abul- 
faragius  or  Bar  Hebraeus,  a  writer  of  the  thirteenth.  4)  Lastly,  the 
Arabic  dialect  in  poems  more  ancient  than  Mohammed  contains  the 
same  words,  and  forms  of  words,  the  same  inflexions,  significations, 
and  phrases  as  are  found  in  the  more  modern  books,  and  also  in  Arabic 
manuscripts  of  our  own  age.    Comp.  my  Arabic  Chrestomathy. 

§  76.     The  large  number  of  significations  presents  no  difficulty. 

Those  who  are  apprehensive  lest  the  multitude  of  significations 
which  are  collected  from  all  the  cognate  dialects  rather  distract 
Jian  assist  the  interpreter,  do  not  seem  to  understand  the  subject ; 
since  the  preceding  and  subsequent  contexts,  the  subject  itself,  and 
other  circumstances,  indicate  with  sufiicient  accuracy  the  meaning  in 
any  particular  place.  If  this  indication  is  occasionally  somewhat  ob- 
scure, the  same  is  often  the  case  in  Greek  and  Latin  books  ;  and  as 
in  those  the  tenor  of  discourse,  the  subject,  the  scope  of  the  author, 
and  other  circumstances,  are  the  more  carefully  weighed  in  order  to 
unfold  the  true  signification  of  a  word,  or  sense  of  a  passage  ;  so  the 
same  method  must  be  pursued,  in  similar  cases,  with  the  Hebrew 
(ext  of  the  Old  Testament.  If  in  some  instances  even  this  should 
not  be  sufficient  to  dispel  the  darkness,  we  must  remember  that  a 
similar  result  is  not  unfrequently  experienced  with  relation  to  ancient 
^vorks  in  Greek  and  Latin.  But  in  proportion  as  the  connexion,  the 
design,  the  scope,  and  other  circumstances  of  the  discourse,  arei 
jHcurately  compared,  will  the  number  of  obscurities  diminish. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  91 

§  77.      Twofold  advantage  of  the  use  of  the  Dialects. 

The  benefit  which  arises  from  the  study  of  the  dialects  is  twofold. 
There  is  first  the  advantage,  in  itself  considerable  and  of  frequent  oc- 
currence, of  elucidating  difficult  words,  phrases,  and  passages,  not 
indeed  with  absolute  certainty  in  all  cases,  but  in  many  only  with  pro- 
babihty.  Secondly,  there  is  the  certainty  which  results  as  to  the  sig- 
nification of  all  the  other  Hebrew  words,  and  as  to  the  meaning  of 
the  whole  sacred  text :  so  that  the  sense  may  be  positively 
known,  and  a  reason  given  for  it.  For  without  a  knowledge  of  the 
dialects,  v/e  should  be  obliged  implicitly  to  trust  the  old  translations 
and  Rabbinical  works,  and  it  would  be  impossible  to  distinguish  be- 
tween what  is  true  and  what  is  false,  what  is  certain  and  what  is 
doubtful.  This  advantage  is  far  superior  to  the  former.  It  is  not  dis- 
cernible in  commentaries  and  scholia,  but  in  the  more  improved 
lexicons,  in  which  almost  all  that  is  certain  respecting  the  signifi- 
cation of  Hebrew  words  is  found  to  be  confirmed  by  the  testimony 
of  the  dialects ;  and  the  significations  of  those  words  only,  which 
are  destitute  of  aid  from  this  source,  are  left  in  obscurity  and  doubt. 

§  78.     Proper  comparison  of  the  Dialects. 

In  order  to  derive  these  advantages  from  the  cognate  dialects, 
several  circumstances  must  be  attended  to. — 1)  They  must  all  be 
compared.  For  a  word,  or  the  true  signification  of  a  word  in  the 
place  under  examination,  may  exist  in  the  very  dialect  which  is  omit- 
ted in  the  comparison.  Thus  nav,  to  loatch,  to  look  out  from  a  watch- 
tower,  and  2T\'-A,  to  love,  are  employed  in  these  significations  only  in 
the  Samaritan  ;  and  it  is  only  in  the  Ethiopic  that  Sdj  has  the  mean- 
ing of  bottle  and  a  musical  instrument-,  as  it  has  also  in  Hebrew.  Too 
much  must  not  be  expected  from  one  dialect,  as  the  followers  of 
Schultens  have  done  in  relation  to  the  Arabic,  the  Jews  to  the  Chal- 
dee,  Ludolph  to  the  Ethiopic.  Nor  should  a  particular  preference  be 
given  to  any  one.     It  may  be  of  use,  however,  to  observe,  that  the 

Aramaean  dialect  is  most  frequently  employed  in  the  later  books. 2) 

It  is   necessary  to  avoid  all  artificial  accommodation  of  words  and 
meanings  in  the  dialects  to  the  Hebrew.     The  simplest  comparison  is 


y2       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO    THE    SACRED   BOOKS 

by  far  the  best ;  whatever  is  artificial  is  hardly  free  from  suspi- 
cion.  3)  In  the  comparison  of  words,  the  analogy  of  the  change 

of  certain  letters  (respecting  which  I  have  treated  in  my  Arabic  gram- 
mar, §  22—36  p.  46 — 75.,)  is  to  be  observed ;  and  although  the  ex- 
ceptions from  this  analogy  are  by  no  means  to  be  altogether  rejected, 
yet  they  are  not  to  be  rashly  admitted.     Thus  lytt',  a  gate,  is  to  be 

c  /  /  / 

compared  with  g    ^,,    and  the  Aramaean  N;?ir\,  and  !j3n  is  properly 

compared  with    '^  '  ^   but  not  so  nn  with  ^Xi^sr^  which  is  only 

sometimes  equivalent  to  ^iV^'    the  heat  of  fire,  while  properly  it 

denotes  a  valley. 4)    In  some  words  a  transposition  of  letters 

takes  place  ;  but  this  is  never  to  be  approved  of,  unless  the  case  be 
very  clear,  or  no  other  word  exist  in  the  dialects,  which  corresponds 
with  t^e  Hebrew  without  transposition.     For  instance  yj*»  is  not  to  be 

compared  with    ^^y'  to  vibrate,  because  the  word  {\*J  to  return, 

is  at  hand. 5)  If  in  the  dialects  there  are  several  words  corres- 
ponding with  a  single  Hebrew  word,  either  on  account  of  one  or  more 
letters  of  that  word  having  a  twofold  pronunciation,  or  for  some  other 
reason,  they  must  all  be  compared.  Thus  it  is  necessary  to  compare  with 
the  Hebrew  :3Vy  not  only      '      •'    '      to  hind,  to  gird,   but  also 


I      I       I 


r      If 


to  cut,    c—Kjit-\f-^    to  seize,  and    C-.A>\r^n     to  he  an- 

gfy, 6)  Care  must  be  taken  lest  for  words  whose  signification  is 

certain,  other  meanings  be  sought  for  in  the  dialects,  to  estabhsh  some 
new  opinion.      Thus   in  Isa.  liii.  9.   ywy  has  been  compared  with 

"VLci  c<^spitans,  stumbling,*  although  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew 

word  is  certain,  and  supported  by  the  testimony  of  the  Aramaean 
dialect. 7)  Lastly  ;  the  interpreter  must  not  content  himself  with 

a 

*  [That  if,  in  a  moral  point  of  view,  peccator,  scelestas.    Tr.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  93 

a  comparison  of  isolated  words,  the  phrases  must  be  compared,  and 
this  affords  by  far  the  most  extensive  field  of  investigation. 

§  79.  Use  of  Lexicons. 
The  best  Lexicons  of  the  dialects,  as  those  of  Golius  and  Giggeius 
for  the  Arabic,  that  of  Castell,  with  the  additions  of  Michaelis,  for 
the  Syriac,  and  that  of  Bcxtorf  for  the  Chaldee,  are  indeed  of  great 
service  ;  yet  the  use  of  them  alone  is  by  no  means  sufficient.  For  1 ) 
Lexicons  are  not  always  resorted  to  when  they  might  be,  or  examined 
in  the  place  where  they  ought  to  be,  since  the  explanation  is  sometimes 

given  under  another  word  not  thought  of 2)  The  Latin  words  by 

which  the  Oriental  are  rendered  are  often  ambiguous  and  badly  under- 
stood.  3)  A  lexicon  does  not  always  remove  all  doubt  respecting 

the  meaning  of  a  word,  or  impress  it  deeply  on  the  mind  ;  but  a  word 
read  in  a  regularly  connected  composition  conveys  an  idea  established 
by  the  series  of  discourse,  and  becomes  deeply  fixed  in  the  memory, 
so  that  when  a  similar  Hebrew  word  is  met  with  it  spontaneously  occurs 

to  the  mind. 4)  Las^tly,  lexicons  neither  do  nor  can  comprehend 

all  the  riches  of  a  language,  and  all  its  phrases  ;  much  less  can  they 
determine  the  interior  character  of  a  language,  and  all  its  tropes, 
figures,  and  modes  of  speech.     This  must  all  be  acquired  from  reading 

books.     Thus  ^c>J!Jj  to  breaks  means  also  to  wound,  an  example  of 

which  may  be  seen  in  I  Cor.  xi.  24.  But  this  is  a  meaning  not  given 
in  GoLiDs,  though  it  occurs  in  Abdollatif,  Memor.  .^gypti,  p.  13  ; 
in  my  Chrestomathy,  p.  117. 

§  80.     Value  of  particular  jMalects. 

Although  all  the  dialects  are  to  be  compared,  they  are  not  all 
equally  rich,  nor  do  they  bring  equal  aid,  or  afford  equal  certainty. 
The  richest  is  the  Arabic,  which  has  preserved  veiy  much  that  is  lost 
from  the  Hebrew.  It  is  also  more  implicitly  to  be  rehed  on  than  the 
others,  because  it  is  even  to  this  day  the  vernacular  language  in  very 
extensive  regions,  and  abounds  with  books  of  all  kinds,  many  of 
which  have  been  printed,  and  open  to  us  a  source  from  which  we 
may  draw  largely.  It  contains  also  poems,  from  which  the  genius  of 
oriental  poetry  is  discovered,  so  that  the  poems  of  the  Hebrews  may 


-^4        GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO    THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

be  properly  understood  and  accurately  estimated.  Lexicons  also, 
composed  by  orientals,  are  found  in  it.  Of  these,  especially  that  of 
Gjauiiari  has  been  abridged  by  Golius,  and  Giggeius  has  drawn 
largely  from  that  of  Firuzabad. 

The  Syriac  dialect  is  the  next  in  importance.  For  a  century  past 
it  has  ceased  to  be  a  Hving  language,  except  in  a  few  villages  of 
Antilibanus ;  but  it  remains  in  many  versions  of  the  Bible,  and  in 
other  writings,  not  a  few  of  which  are  printed  in  Jos.  Asseman's 
Bibliotheca  Orientalis,  4  vols,  folio.  To  these  may  be  added  the 
works  of  Ephraim-  3  vols,  folio,  Stephen  Asseman's  Acts  of  the 
Martyrs,  2  vols,  folio,  and  the  Chronicle  of  Arulfaragius,  in  4to. 
There  are  extant  also  two  Lexicons  of  the  language,  written  by  na- 
tives, which  are  preserved  in  the  library  at  Ley  den,  on,e  composed  by 
IsA  Bar  a  LI  of  the  9th  century,  and  the  other  by  Isa  Bar  Bahlul  of 
the  10th,  the  publication  of  which  has  long  been  wished  for,  but 
hitherto  in  vain. 

The  Chaldee,  or  rather  the  Babylonian  dialect,  is  vernacular  in 
some  villages  of  Mardin  even  in  the  present  day.  To  us,  however, 
it  is  extant  only  in  parts  of  Daniel  and  Ezra,  and  in  the  Paraphrases. 
Besides,  the  Rabbins  have  introduced  much  into  it  which  is  not  well 
supported,  and  therefore  we  cannot  always  safely  trust  it,  unless  its 
sister  dialect,  the  Syriac,  lend  its  aid. 

These  are  the  three  principal  dialects,  the  knowledge  of  which  is 
necessary  to  every  thorough  theologian,  who  wishes  to  examine  not 
with  the  eyes  of  others  but  with  his  own  ;  to  know,  not  merely  from 
the  statements  of  others,  but  from  his  own  investigation.  The  inter- 
preter who  would  resolve  all  the  difficulties  of  the  Bible,  and  illus- 
trate all  its  obscurities,  must  consult  also  the  other  cognate  dialects. 
These  are  1)  the  Ethiopic  or  Abyssinian-,  which  is  to  the  present  day 
vernacular  in  the  province  of  Tigre.  In  Bruce  Reis.  L  Th.  S.  379, 
Anhang,  S.  88.*  Cuhne's  translation.  No  printed  works  are  ex- 
tant, except  those  wliich  have  been  mentioned  in  §  57. 2)   The : 

Samaritan,  confined  to  the  version  of  the  Pentateuch. 3)    The 

Tahnudic,  sufficiently  rich  indeed  of  itself,  but  uncertain  on  account 
of  many  significations  forced  upon  the  Hebrew  words.     This  dialect 

*  [Bruce'S  Travels,  Appendix,  Vol.  I.  p.  493.     Tr.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  95 

tlierefore,  is  not  to  be  used  except  'where  the  others  are  inadequate. 

4]    The  Plicenician,   Punic,   and   Palmyrene,  only  fragments  of 

which  are  extant  in  inscriptions  and  coins,  in  the  works  of  Augustin, 
and  in  some  classical  writers.  The  other  oriental  languages  are  not 
indeed  cognate  to  the  Hebrew,  but  still  they  afford  no  contemptible 
aid  to  the  interpreter,  [a] 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  preceding  sections,  comp.  Parkac 
Instit.  Interp.  Vet.  Test.  pp.  38—47.  De  Wette  Einleit.  ^  31,  32,  33, 
37.  S.  58.  ff.    Bauer,  Hermeneutica  Sacra,  ^  19—25.  pp.  96—144.     Tr.] 

§  81.     Etymology. 

A  comparison  of  dialects  can  hardly  produce  a  happy  result,  un- 
less attended  by  the  light  of  etymology,  that  is,  the  investigation  of 
the  pnmary  signijication  of  loords,  and  of  the  manner  in  which  other 
significations  have  arisen.  By  the  primary  signification  is  meant,  that 
which  the  inventors  of  the  language  originally  affixed  to  a  word.  In 
order  to  assist  in  discovering  this  original  meaning,  the  following  ob- 
servations ought  to  be  attended  to. 

I.  The  inventors  of  language  were  not  philosophers,  who  would 
have  descended  from  genus  to  species.  They  were  simple  and  un- 
cultivated men,  entirely  dependent  on  their  senses,  who  imposed 
names  first  upon  those  objects  which  struck  their  ears,  eyes,  and  other 
senses  with  most  frequency  or  vehemence.  They  imitated  in  the 
first  place  the  sounds  of  things,  and  thus  the  sound  itself  produced 
by  imitation  was  the  appellation  of  the  sounding  object ;  as  f]ii»,  from 
the  sound  of,  made  by  a  flying  bird  ;  ;rDJ,  from  the  sound  ha,  produ- 
ced by  water  bursting  from  a  fountain.  Significations  and  words  of 
this  kind  are  called  onomatopoetic,  and  very  many  such  still  remain  in 

the  Hebrew. Objects  which  produced  no  sound  and  yet  made  on 

the  senses  an  impression  more  frequent  or  more  vehement  than 
others,  as  the  human  members  and  those  of  animals,  received  their 
names  from  their  imaginary  sound  ;  and  therefore  the  meaning  of 
names  of  this  kind,  as  of  t,  hand,  hyy,foot,  rx^,  a  sheep,  :h2,  a  dog, 

and  others  of  the  same  kind,  are  primary.  [«]  Comp.  the  i>reface  to 
mv  Aramaean  Grammar. 


96    GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

II.  Those  who  invented  language  and  those  who  afterwards  enriched 
and  pohshed  it,  did  not  always  form  new  words  in  order  to  express  new 
ideas  acquired  in  the  course  of  time,  especially  abstract  ideas  and  ideas 
of  objects  which  do  not  affect  the  senses.  To  such  they  often  transfer- 
red old  words,  either  because  they  observed,  or  thought  they  obser- 
ved, some  slight  similitude  or  connexion  of  the  new  object  with  the 
old,  or  because  some  incidental  circumstances  occasioned  the  transfer. 
Hence  the  meanings  of  words  in  which  they  express  abstract  ideas,  or 
ideas  of  objects  not  within  the  scope  of  the  senses,  are  not  'primary, 
but  derived. 

III.  In  the  course  of  time  words  were  more  frequently  transferred 
from  their  primary  significations  to  other  meanings,  often  considerably 
remote,  and  even,  by  irony,  directly  contrary.  Sometimes  this  was 
done  merely  for  the  sake  of  ornament,  or  on  account  of  some  allusion. 
This  secondary  meaning  was  so  often  used,  that  the  original  radical 
signification  became  unfrequent,  or  even  altogether  obsolete.  The 
primary  signification  therefore  is  by  no  means  the  most  common,  but 
is  generally  of  rare  occurrence,  and  frequently  out  of  use,  and  con- 
tinuing only  in  some  one  derived  noun,  or  distinguishable  by  some 
slight  remains,  or  even  totally  lost.  The  use  of  Etymology  therefore 
is  exceedingly  hazardous,  and  by  no  means  successful  in  all  cases. 

IV.  The  transferring  of  words  to  derived  senses,  adopted  by  Orien- 
tals, is  very  often  totally  different  from  that  which  the  analogy  of  our 
languages  would  require.  It  is  governed  by  their  mode  of  thinking,  and 
occasioned  by  the  tropes  and  associations  of  ideas  which  have  ob- 
tained currency  among  them.  These  are  not  at  all  the  same  with 
those  of  the  natives  of  the  west ;  and  therefore  our  derivation  of  ideas 
from  the  primary  one  should  be  coincident  with  those  circumstances 
which  in  this  respect  are  pecuhar  to  the  Orientals. 

[a)  This  appears  to  be  one  of  the  fancies  which  must  result  from  any 
hypothesis  respecting  the  ori^n  of  language,  except  that  which  assumes 
it  to  be  divine.  On  the  subject  of  the  origin  of  language,  see  an  able 
article  in  Magee  on  the  Atonement,  No.  LIII.,  and  compare  the  author? 
referred  to  at  the  end  of  the  Number.     7V.1 


1 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  97 

§  82.     Etymology  does  not  teach  the  true  meaning,  hut  only  illus- 
trates it. 

As  the  association  of  ideas  may  be  endless,  it  is  evident  that  words 
are  susceptible  of  transfer  to  an  almost  indefinite  variety  of  mean- 
ings, and  in  every- language  methods  of  transfer  have  been  arbitrarily 
selected  ;  so  that,  unless  a  man  is  omniscient,  he  cannot  possibly  di- 
vine all  the  associations  of  ideas  or  transfers  of  words  which  any 
people  may  have  adopted.  It  is  evident,  then,  that  derivative  mean- 
ings cannot  be  deduced  with  certainty  from  the  primary  idea  ;  the 
possibility  of  any  particular  transfer  being  all  that  can  be  inferred. 
But  although  it  follows  from  this  that  etymology  can  by  no  means 
teach  the  derived  and  commonly  used  ideas  of  words,  it  is  not  on  this 
account  to  be  considered  as  unproductive,  for  it  yields  the  interpre- 
ter many  and  great  advantages  of  another  kind. 1)  It  illustrates 

derived  significations,  and  renders  them  clearer  and  distinct,  as  in 

;?'3in,  Comp.    %^S;  i^*i%  Comp.  ^wa;  to  which  might  be  added 

mi,  rw^,  noN,  bSn,  and  others. 2)    Such  illustrations  are  more 

important  where  synonymes  are  joined  together,  one  of  which  ex- 
presses more  than  another,  as  en  and  dSdj  in  Isa.  xh.  11.  xlv.  \Q., 

and  nnty  and  n;?  in  Job  xvi.    19. 3)    The  syntax,   sometimes 

anomalous,  receives  light  from  etymology  ;  as,  for  instance,  this  shows 
why  3JV'  ^f*  love,  and  nn3,  to  choose,  are  construed  with  the  prefixes 

Sy  and  3,  Din,  <o  spare,  (Comp.  -  f        and  f.    )  with '7jr, 

and  32>pn»  (Comp.  c_aaXn->)  with  S  apphed  to  the  person. 

Etymology  is  also  of  very  great  service  to  the  memory,  which  re- 
tains with  the  more  facility  the  various  and  sometimes  widely  diverging 
meanings  of  the  same  word,  if  it  have  in  the  primary  signification 
a  firm  centre  point,  as  it  were,  to  which  it  can  connect  the  other 
meanings  by  different  lines  and  circles  supplied  by  etymology. 

1? 


98       GENERAL  LNTRODUCTION    TO    THE    SACRED  BOOR- 

§  83.   The  necessity  of  Etymology. 

But  it  is  not  only  for  the  illustration  of  meanings,  and  for  a  correci 
and  advantageous  comparison  of  dialects,  that  etymology  is  required ; 

there  arc  also  other  reasons  on  account  of  which  it  is  necessary. 1) 

In  the  Bible  the  primary  signification  does  sometimes  occur,  although 
obscure  and  indistinct,  as  in  Ex.  xiv.  5.,  in  the  verb  n'O?  tojly,  the 

original  meaning  of  which,  is  to  turn  the  left  side  to-jlci]  so  also  in 
13"n,  (used  in  its  primitive  sense  of  led,  ductus,)  in  Prov.  xxv.  11. 

Comp.  also  Prov.  xiii.  20.  [6] 2)  There  is  often  an  allusion  to  the 

primary  meaning,  as  in  the  words  mx  and  c^iJX  in  Eccl.  vi.  10.  Ps. 

viii.  5.  ix.  20,  21.,  and  not  unfroquently  also  in  the  word  nir»'.  In- 
deed sometimes  the  trope,  by  which  a  word  is  transferred  from  its 
primary  signification  to  others,  is  changed  into  a  simile  or  allegory 
which  it  is  impossible  to  understand  without  resorting  to  etymology ; 
as  for  instance,  the  phrase — to  heap  coals  of  fire  upon  an  enemy's 
Ivead,  Prov.  xxv.  22.  Rom.  xii.  20.,  which  conveys  no  other  meaning 
than   what  is  expressed  by  the   etymological  signification  of  nSy, 

/      r 
JJLy—  to  apply  to  the  fire,  to  scorch,  to  roast,  then  to  roa^t  a  man  as  it 

were;  but  in  the  second  form,  to  render  well  disposed  to  one's  self;  then 
in  fine,  to  render  God  disposed  or  propitious  to  him,  tliat  is,  to  pray.  The 
same  method  of  transfer  is  observed  in  the  use  of  the  Talmudic  word 
ibo,   to  be  burnt,  and  to  pray. 3)  Doubts  which  sometimes  arise 

respecting  some  particular  signification  of  a  word  which  is  very  re- 
mote from  its  other  meanings,  cannot  be  removed  except  by  etymo- 
logy, which  shows  that  this  signification  may  bo  conveyed  by  the  word. 
An  example  of  this  is  afforded  in  the  word  DHDD,  in  Ps.  xvi.  1.  Ivi.  1. 

hii.  1.  Iviii.  1.  lix.  1.  Ix.  1.,  which  is  rendered  by  the  Alexandrine 
translation  and  by  Theodotion,  an  inscription  on  a  stone  or  pillar, 
g'rikoy^acpta,  a  meaning  quite  foreign  from  the  other  significations  of 
the  word  ;  but  the  primary  idea  which  remains  in  the  Syriac  dialect, 

to  impress  scars,  to  mark,  gives  a  reason  for  that  version. 4) 

Words  and  significations  whicli  occur  but  rarely,  or  only  once,  and 
derive  no  light  from  the  dialects,  are  to  be  investigated  by  means  of 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  99 

the  series  of  the  discourse  and  the  subject ;  yet  this  is  a  very  dangerous 
matter,  unless  the  primary  signification  aiford  assistance.  Comp. 
'^'J/)2,  to  delay,  in  Jud.  v.  28.  from  mi-,  to  he  dry,  to  he  dry  in  the 

mouth,  to  hesitate  in  discourse. 5)  The  old  versions,  without  the 

aid  of  which  the  interpreter  of  the  O.  T.  cannot  succeed,  are  not  to 
be  understood  without  the  hght  of  etymology,  since  they  crflen  express 
the  original  meaning.  Thus  the  Alexandrine  version  in  Hab.  i.  5. 
(Comp.  Acts  xiii.  41.)  has  aqjavitf^/lTS,  for  innn,  which  is  correctly  ren- 
dered by  the  Vulgate  ;  admiramini.  But  in  other  translations  it  is 
rendered  according  to  the  derived  idea,  disparete,  which  gives  no 
sense.     The  original  meaning  of  afpavii^ofxaj  and  noo  is  to  change  odour 

or  colour;  hence  to  tiii'npale,  to  become  astonished.  Comp.  Matt.  vi.  16, 

The  etymology  of  the  Shemitish  language  is  necessary  also  in  order  to 
understand  some  places  of  the  Nev/  Testament.  See  Germ.  Introd. 
p.  300,  301. 

[a)  According  to  this  interpretation,  the  meaning  of  D^n  n*l3  O 

would  be,  that  the  Israelites  had  turned  to  the  right,  on  their  departure 
from  Egypt.  See  the  Germ.  Introd.  p.  297,  and  Comp.  Mich.  Sup.  Heb. 
Lex.  p.  219.  RosENMUEL.  Scholia  in  loc.  rejects  this  meaning  of  the 
text.  Tr.]  '/ 

[6)  See  Storkii  Observat.  ad  Analogiam  et  syntaxinHebraJcum.  p.  5. 
MiCHAELis  Suppl.  in  voce.  TV.]  ^ 

§  84.     Limits  of  Etymology. 

In  urging  the  utility  of  etymology,  it  is  not  meant  that  the  primary 
meaning  of  every  word,  which  in  many  instances  is  involved  in  obscurity 
or  altogether  lost,  is  really  to  be  discovered,  but  only  that  the  investi- 
gation is  to  be  continued  as  far  as  it  is  possible  to  advance.  If  an 
onomatopbetic  meaning  can  be  found,  or  at  least  the  idea  of  a  thing 
subject  to  the  operation  of  the  senses,  from  which  all  the  other  signi- 
fications can  readily  be  deduced  according  to  the  original  usage  by  a 
person  skilled  in  languages,  this  is  to  be  set  down  as  the  primary  sig- 
nification of  the  word  ;  but  if  nothing  of  this  kind  is  discoverable,  we 
must  content  ourselves  with  such  other  testimonies  respecting  the 
meaning  as  may  be  within  our  reach.     It  is  by  no  means  requisite  tbaf 


100      GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

one  common  original  idea  should  be  sought  for  in  the  different  mean- 
ings of  such  words  as  are  written  with  the  same  letters  but  distin- 
guished by  a  different  pronunciation.  In  very  many  of  these  it  never 
existed,  since  they  are  often  really  different  words,  to  each  of  which 
the  inventors  of  the  language  originally  attributed  a  different  idea. 

§  85.     The  ancient  translators  as  witnesses  of  the  usage  of 
language. 

It  has  been  already  stated,  (§  71,)  that  the  ancient  translators  of 
the  Old  Testament  are  inadequate  witnesses  respecting  the  usage  of 
language,  on  account  of  their  remoteness  from  the  age  when  the  lan- 
guage was  vernacular.  This  cannot  be  denied,  if  direct  and  imme- 
diate witnesses  be  meant,  but  there  can  be  no  objection  to  admitting 
them  as  mediate  and  indirect  witnesses,  and  as  such  their  authority 
is  supported  on  two  grounds.  1)  The  periods  in  which  several  of 
them  lived  approximated  to  that  in  which  the  Hebrew  was  a  verna- 
cular language.  These  were  acquainted  with  very  many  words  pre- 
served in  common,  or  liturgic,  or  scholastic  use,  the  meaning  of 
which  they  preserved  in  their  versions,  from  which  it  may  be 
deduced  by  us.  This  principle  is  of  the  fuller  application,  if  the 
words  are  such  as  are  peculiar  to  the  Hebrew  dialect,  and  have  the 
same  meaning  given  in  all  the  versions,  and  also  confirmed  by  etymo- 
logy.  2)  To  many  of  the  ancient  translators  some  dialect  cognate 

to  the  Hebrew  was  vernacular,  and  thus  they  enjoyed  the  benefit  of  a 
more  extensive  and  more  perfect  acquaintance  with  it  than  could 
otherwise  possibly  be  attained,  which,  by  consequence,  shed  a  clearer 
light  on  the  Hebrew.  The  mediate  and  indirect  testimony  of  the 
ancient  translators  is  therefore  of  great  importance,  and  not  to  be 
neglected,  although  by  a  comparison  of  all  the  dialects,  and  by  Ihe 
rules  of  granunar  and  criticism,  a  superiority  over  them  may  be 
acquired. 

§  86.     Twofold  advantage  of  the  ancient  versions. 

It  is  the  duty  of  a  translator  to  express  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew 
phrases  in  a  manner  adapted  to  the  usage  of  his  own  language,  with- 
out a  servile  adherence  to  words  or  etymology.  But,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  Symmachus,  there  is  scarcely  any  one  of  the  old  transla- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  101 

tors  that  has  constantly  attended  to  this  most  important  rule  of  inter- 
pretation ;  almost  all  eagerly  cling  to  the  words,  and  continually  give 
the  etymological  meaning.  This,  however,  which  is  a  fault  in  their 
works  considered  as  translations,  frequently  renders  them  useful  to 
us  by  affording  us  indications  of  the  etymology  of  words.  Neverthe- 
less, these  must  not  be  implicitly  received,  but  should  be  subjected  to 
accurate  and  impartial  examination. 

But  the  principal  information  to  be  derived  from  the  versions,  con- 
sists in  the  significations  of  words  and  the  meanings  of  sentences. 
The  necessity  of  the  use  of  them  for  this  purpose  might  be  shown  by 
an  ample  induction  of  particulars,  since  there  are  very  many  words 
the  definitive  meaning  of  which  cannot  be  ascertained  from  the  dia- 
lects.    Thus,  it  is  only  from  the  versions  that  we  learn  that  n^N  and 

p"?N  mean  a  terebinth,  but  nbx  an  oak. The  Aramaean  jS'-x  signi- 
fies a  tree,  and  of  course  it  would  be  impossible  from  this  dialect  to 
determine  what  trees  were  designated  by  those  Hebrew  words. 
Oomp.  also  eiSN,  \Y,  &c. 


§  87.     What  versions  ought  to  be  used. 

Those  translators  who  have  merely  transferred  some  ancient  version 
into  the  idiom  of  their  own  nation,  neither  examined  nor  understood 
the  Hebrew  text,  and  consequently  they  are  incompetent  to  testify 
respecting  the  Hebrew  usage  of  language.  AU  these  mediate  ver- 
sions, therefore,  such  as  the  Hexaplar  Syriac,  the  Arabic  in  the  Lon- 
don Polyglot  with  the  exception  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  old  Latin,  the 
translation  of  the  Psalter  in  the  Vulgate,  the  Ethiopic,  Coptic,  Sa- 
hidic,  Armenian,  and  Slavonic  versions,  are  of  no  utility  in  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  Hebrew  text.  Those  only  which  were  made  imme- 
diately from  the  Hebrew  are  useful  for  this  purpose,  in  all  of  which  is 
dispersed  that  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  which  the  translators  found 
preserved  in  common  use,  in  the  public  service,  or  in  the  schools,  or 
which  was  afforded  by  the  aid  of  their  own  vernacular  cognate  lan- 
guage. For  this  reason  none  of  these  versions  are  to  be  entirely 
neglected  ;  yet  they  do  not  all  offer  equal  advantages,  and  therefore 
aorae,  either  for  their  antiquity  or  superior  excellence,  are  preferable 


102  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

to  others,  nearly  in  the  following  order. 1)  The  Alexandrine  ver- 
sion is  the  most  ancient,  and,  although  it  abounds  with  errors,  con- 
tains very  much  that  is  useful,[a]  on  which  account  it  has  been  used 
by  all  the  ancient  translators.  With  it  must  be  joined  the  fragments 
of  the  versions  of  Aquila,  Theodotion,  Symmachus,  the  bth,  6th,  and 
7th  versions,[b]  an  attentive  use  of  all  which  is  also  the  best  prepa- 
ration for  explaining  the  New  Testament. 2)  The  Syriac  Peshito, 

the  authors  of  which  are  superior  to  the  other  translators,  not  only  in 
antiquity,  but  also  in  erudition  and  discernment,  and  by  the  circum- 
stance of  Syriac  being  their  vernacular  tongue.  The  use  of  this 
version,  so  far  as  it  assists  in  the  acquisition  of  the  Syriac  language, 
increases  also  the  helps  for  the  interpretation  of  the  New  Testament. 

3)  The  Latin  Vulgate,  except  the  Psalter,  merits  the  third  place, 

having  been  made  by  Jerome,  a  man  versed  in  all  kinds  of  knowledge, 
instructed  by  the  most  learned  Jewish  teachers,  who  had  acquired 
almost  all  that  in  his  day  remained  of  the  Hebrew  language,  and  ex- 

liibited  the  result  in  his  translation  and  commentaries. 4)   The 

Targums  do  indeed  contain  much  that  is  objectionable,  but  more 
that  is  of  the  highest  utility,  and  necessary  to  be  known.  The  ver- 
nacular language  of  the  authors  was  Chaldee,  and  therefore  they 
were  acquainted,  especially  the  more  ancient,  with  as  much  of  the 
Hebrew  language  as  had  been  preserved  until  their  age.  The  use 
of  these  paraphrases  is  almost  the  only  method  of  learning  the  Chal- 
dee dialect,  which  is  an  essential  requisite  for  the  interpretation  of 
the  New  Testament. 5)  Lastly  may  be  mentioned  the  other  im- 
mediate versions,  particularly  those  in  the  Arabic,  which,  although 
they  cannot  be  recommended  for  their  antiquity,  are  important  on 
account  of  the  connexion  of  the  Arabic,  their  vernacular  laiiguage. 
with  the  Hebrew. 

[a)  See  Chr.  Fr.  Schmidt's  two  dissertations,  entitled  Versio  Alex- 
andrina  optimum  interpretationis  librorum  V.  T.  presidium,  1763,  1764.1 

[6)  See  JoH.  Fr.  Fischeri  Prolusiones  de  versionibus  Graecis  libr^ 
mm  V.  T.  literarum  Hehraicarum  mas^istris,  1772.1 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  103 

§  88.     Tke  method  in  which  the  versions  ought  to  he  used. 

The  method  of  using  the  versions  is  twofold.  1 )  Compare  the  trans- 
lation of  any  book  throughout,  word  for  word  and  sentence  for  sen- 
tence, with  the  Hebrew  text-  and  note  the  useful  observations  which 
such  a  comparison  affords  on  the  margin,  or  on  the  interleaved  sheets 
of  a  good  lexicon,  where  they  can  readily  be  referred  to  on  any  occa- 
sion. This  method  of  using  a  version  supplies  many  hermeneutical 
helps,  and  at  the  same  time  affords  instruction  respecting  the  charac- 
ter of  the  version.  It  would  be  proper,  therefore,  to  confine  one's  self 
to  this,  were  not  life  too  short  for  so  great  a  labour.     As  it  is,  one  or 

two  books  must  comprise  the  extent  of  such  an  examination. 2) 

Consult  the  versions  only  in  the  more  difficult  places.  For  this  piu'- 
pose  concordances  which  add  the  corresponding  Hebrew  words  are 
very  useful,  because  they  exhibit  at  one  view  all  the  meanings  which 
are  attributed  in  the  version  to  any  word.  There  are  only  two  con- 
cordances of  this  kind  for  the  Alexandrine  version  ;  Kircher's, 
printed  in  1607,  which  follows  the  order  of  the  Hebrew  alphabet, 
but  contains  also  an  appendix  arranged  according  to  that  of  the 
Greek  ;  and  Tromm's,  printed  in  1728,  which  is  composed  after  the 
order  of  the  Greek  alphabet,  and  is  accompanied  by  an  appendix 
made  after  the  Hebrew  order,  and  a  lexicon  for  the  study  of  Origen's 
Hexapla.  To  these  Concordances  are  to  be  added  Biel's  Thesau- 
rus Philologicus  seu  Lexicon  in  LXX.  et  alios  interpretes  V.  T., 
1779,  and  Schleusner's  Spicilegium  Lexici  in  interpretes  Grsecos 
V.  T.  maxime  Scriptores  Apocryphos,  1784  and  1786  ;*  also,  Glossae 
Sacras  Hesychii,  Grasce,  1785,  and  Suid^  et  Piiavorini  Glossa;  Sa- 
crae,  Grasce,  1786,  which  were  separately  edited  by  Ernesti. 

§  89.     Requisites  for  a  proper  use  of  tke  versions. 

In  order  that  the  versions  may  afford  the  expected  benefit,  some 
qualifications  must  previously  be  possessed.  1)  A  knowledge  of  the 
cognate  dialects  must  be  obtained.     For  as  there  is  no  version  with- 

*  [Since  this  time,  Schleusner  has  published  his  Novus  Thesaurus  Philologico- 
Criticus  sive  Lexicon  in  LXX.  et  reliquos  interpretes  Graecos  ac  Scriptores  Apocry- 
phos V.  T.,  5  vol.  8vo.  1820,  1821 ;  to  which  also  a  Supplement  has  been  furnished 
by  Bretschneider,  2  vol.  8vo.  1822,     Tr.] 


104  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

out  many  errors,  the  meanings  given  to  the  Hebrew  are  to  be  ex- 
amined by  the  dialects  ;  and  a  reader  unacquainted  with  them  will 
often  charge  the  translator  with  ignorance,  when  his  more  extensive 
knowledge  of  the  language,  attested  by  the  evidence  of  the  dialects, 
rather  entitles  him  to  praise,  even  admitting  that  by  obtruding  the 
meaning  in  a  place  to  which  it  does  not  apply  he  has  erred  against 
the  rules  of  interpretation.     Comp.  in  the  Vulgate,  Hab.  ii.  9,  qui 

congregat  avaritiam,  and  in  the  Septuagint,  ii.  5,  crsgav/j. 2)  An 

accurate  and  extensive  acquaintance  with  the  language  in  which  the 
version  is  composed  is  necessary.  It  is  impossible  to  use  translations 
of  translations  without  falling  into  errors  ;  and  this  will  be  unavoid- 
able if  the  erroneous  Latin  translations  of  the  Oriental  versions  in 
the  Polyglots,  are  relied  on.  How  great  a  knowledge  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  version  is  requisite,  may  be  illustrated  by  the  fact,  that 
men  in  other  respects  not  unlearned,  have  misunderstood  several 
places  of  our  Latin  Vulgate  ;*  as  is  proved  by  their  expositions  of 
certain  words,  as  visitare,  which  is  rendered  to  visit,  while  it  means 
to  regard,  favourably  or  unfavourably ;  sacramentum,  in  Eph.  v.  32, 
which  has  been  explained  according  to  its  ecclesiastical  use,  of  a  sa- 
crament, although  hke  the  Greek  fj^usngm  it  means  a  secret,  in  wliich 
sense  Jerome  uses  it  when  he  writes  to  Paulinus  :  "  Apocalypsis  tot 
habet  sacramenta  quot  verba;"  lucifer  in  Isa.  xiv.  12,  and  wm^o;  in 
Zeph.  iii.  18. — - — 3)  A  knowledge  of  the  art  of  criticism  is  requisite. 
This  is  important,  not  merely  in  order  to  form  a  judgment  of  the 
readings  of  a  version,  but  also  that  we  may  not  accuse  an  ancient 
translator  of  error  where  he  expresses  a  reading  different  from  that 
now  commonly  received.     Thus  in  Ps.  xxii.  18,  for  ''1N3,  as  the  lion, 

the  Septuagint  has  w^u|av,  tliey  have  pierced  through,  which  was  deri- 
ved from  the  reading  ■n3  or  nx3. 4)  The  last  requisite  is  a  skil- 
ful observation  of  difficult  and  obscure  passages,  which  the  transla- 
tors not  having  understood,  have  conjectured  the  sense  from  the  sub- 
ject, the  series  of  discourse,  and  other  circumstances.  With  regard 
to  such,  they  cannot  be  considered  as  witnesses  ;  they  merely  pass  a 
judgment  on  the  probabihty,  to  do  which  we  are  as  competent  as 
themselves,  or  more  so. 


*  [Tbe  teatlQr  Tyill  recollect  that  the  author  is  a  Roman  Catholic.    Tr.] 


I 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  \{)J 

§  90.     Josephus  and  the  Fathers  of  the  Church. 

The  Jewish  Antiquities  of  Josephus,  may  be  reckoned  among  the 
versions  ;  for  although  he  followed  the  Alexandrine,  yet  he  often  ex- 
amined the  Hebrew  text,  as  is  proved  by  his  abandoning  the  sense  of 
that  version  in  very  many  places.  With  regard  to  these  he  is  an 
evidence  of  great  authority,  for  he  is  more  ancient  than  the  other 
translators  except  the  Alexandrine,  the  Chaldee  was  his  vernacular 
dialect,  and,  as  he  was  a  learned  priest  and  subsequently  a  comman- 
der of  an  army  in  Galilee  during  the  war  witli  the  Romans,  he  was 
well  versed  in  all  ecclesiastical,  civil  and  military  matters.  His  rea- 
ders, however,  will  find  it  necessary  not  rashly  to  give  credence  to  all 
his  statements,  especially  such  as  are  warped  in  favour  of  his  own 
nation  or  even  of  the  heathens,  or  such  as  represent  the  temple  of 
Solomon  by  a  description  taken  from  that  of  Herod. 

Whatever  is  found  in  the  writings  of  Origen  and  Jerome  relating 
to  the  Hebrew,  and  in  the  books  of  Augustin  to  the  Punie,  is  by  no 
means  to  be  disregarded  ;  for  those  writings  contain  much  informa- 
tion to  which  nothing  superior  has  yet  been  advanced.  Much  oi 
what  occurs  on  this  subject  in  Justin,  Epiphanius,  and  Theodorct,  is 
of  no  great  consequence,  although  there  are  some  things  which  de- 
serve attention.  The  other  fathers  depended  on  tlie  versions,  and 
had  no  acquaintance  with  Hebrew  learning,  and  therefore  cannot 
testify  respecting  the  usage  of  that  language. 

§  91.     Decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  respecting  Interpretation. 

Lest  any  should  consider  the  opinion  just  stated  as  injurious  to  the 
fathers  of  the  church,  I  have  thought  proper  to  add  the  decree  of 
the  Council  of  Trent,  Session  4th.  The  holy  Synod,  '•  in  order  to 
restrain  petulant  minds,  decrees,  that  no  one  relying  on  his  own 
knowledge,  shall  presume  to  interpret  scripture,  in  matters  of  faith 
and  morals  relating  to  the  edification  of  the  church,  distorting  tlie  sa- 
cred scripture  to  senses  of  his  own  contrary  to  that  sense  which 
mother  church  hath  held  and  doth  hold,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  judge 
of  the  true  sense  of  the  holy  scriptures,  or  even  contrary  to  the  una- 
nimous consent  of  the  fathers.''''*     A  few  remarks  will  be  sufficieni. 

*  ["  Ad  c6ercenda;>eiM/a«<Ja  ingenia  decernit"  (sacrosancta  synodus)  "  ut  nemo 
suae  prndentiae  innixus,  in  rebus  fidfi  etmorum  ad  aedificationem  ccclrsiae  perli- 

14 


106     GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

1)  The  petulant  minds,  whom  the  council  censures,  are  not  thoa 
Catholics  who  reject,  as  witnesses  of  any  particular  fact,  persons  who 
are  ignorant  of  it ;  or,  which  is  equivalent,  exclude  the  fathers  who 
had  no  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language  from  giving  testimony 
respecting  the  Hebrew  usage «  and  produce  other  witnesses  whom  no 
one  doubts  to  have  understood  and  intended  to  teach  it,  that  is  to  say, 
the  dialects,  which  constitute  one  and  the  same  language  with  the 
Hebrew.  The  decree  strikes  at  those  who  in  that  age  were  intro- 
ducing novelties. 2)  One's  own  knowledge,  which  the  council  re- 
proves, is  not  a  proper  knowledge  ;  unless  a  man  choose  to  pre- 
tend that  the  council  resolved  ignorant  men  to  be  the  best  interpre- 
ters. It  is  the  boasted  perspicacity  of  the  innovators  of  that  age,  by 
means  of  which  they  endeavoured,  by  a  perverted  interpretation   of 

scripture,  to  overturn  ancient  doctrines  and  institutions. 3)  This 

is  confirmed  by  what  follows.  The  knowledge  referred  to,  is  that  on 
which  the  interpreter  depending  distorts  scripture  to  senses  of  his  own, 
to  do  which  has  always  been,  is  still,  and  will  ever  be  unlawful  in  all 
books.  But  no  man  can  distort  scripture  to  a  sense  of  his  own  who 
admits  no  sense  which  is  not  proved  by  competent  witnesses,  whom  no 
one  can  deny  to  know  and  to  testify  to  the  truth. 4)  The  inter- 
preter is  prohibited  from  distorting  scripture  to  senses  of  his  own  in 
matters  of  faith  and  morals,  relating  to  the  edification  of  the  church, 
which  expression,  as  Cardinal  Palavicini  testifies,  (Hist.  Cone.  Trid. 
L.  VI.  c.  8.)  does  not  refer  merely  to  the  words,  contrary  to  that 
sense  which  mother  church  hath  held  and  doth  hold,  but  also  to  those, 
contrary  to  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  fathers  :  and  this  law  of  the 
council  only  provides  that  no  one,  relying  on  an  arrogant  self-conceit, 
shall  force  the  sacred  scripture,  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals,  con- 
traiy  to  the  sense  of  the  church,  or  contrary  to  the  unanimous  consent 
of  the  fathers ;  which  is  repugnant  to  sound  reason,  and,  as  Palavi- 
cini expressly  says,  was  always  unlawful  from  the  very  nature  of  the 
thing.  The  council  therefore  only  declares,  in  what  way  scripture 
in  matters  of  faith  and  morals  is  not  to  be  exf)lained,  but  it  certainly 


nentium,  sacram  scripturam  ad  suos  sensus  contorquens,  contra  earn  sensum  quem 
tenuit  et  tenet  mater  ecclesia,  cujns  est  judicare  de  vero  sensu  sanctarum  scriptura- 
rum,  aut  etiam  contra  unanimem  consensum  Patrum,  ipsam  scripturam  interpretari 
audeat."    Cone.  Trid.  cum  declarat.  ed.  T.  Gallemart,  1722.  p.  9.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  107 

does  not  teach  on  what  principles  it  is  to  he  explained ;  in  a  word,  it  i 
is  merely  a  negative  decree,  not  a  positive. 

That  this  is  the  meaning  of  the  decree,  the  circumstances  of  those 
times  and  the  words  themselves  of  the  Council  plainly  declare ;  and 
consistently  with  this  view  of  the  matter,  Benedict  XIV.  did  not  hesitate 
to  receive  favourably  from  the  Dominican  Milante,  the  dedication  of 
the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  of  SixTus  Senensis,  in  which  objections  are 
made  to  very  many  interpretations  of  the  Fathers ;  and  Cardinal  Ca- 
jetan,  who  interpreted  Scripture  without  any  reference  to  the  fathers, 
and  professed  it  also  in  the  plainest  terms  in  his  dedication  to  Clement  VI., 
although  he  gave  offence  to  many,  is  justified  by  Cardinal  Palavicini, 
(Hist.  Cone.  Trid.  L.  VI.  c.  8.)  If  a  man  will  not  acquiesce  in  this,  he 
must  be  considered  as  a  contentious  person,  and  left  to  put  what  sense 
he  may  think  proper  on  the  decree.  Comp.  Matt.  xv.  14.  Lu. 
vi.  39.  [a] 

[a)  Although  this  section  is  evidently  intended  by  the  author  as  an 
apology  to  some  of  his  brethren  for  his  exclusion  of  the  Fathers  as  wit- 
nesses to  the  usage  of  Hebrew  and  the  cognate  languages,  and  refers  to  a 
difficulty  suggested  by  the  opinion  of  the  infallibility  of  the  Church, 
with  which  Protestants  have  nothing  to  do,  yet  we  have  thought  it  best 
upon  the  whole  to  retain  it.  The  judicious  reader  will  know  how  to  re- 
gard it.  We  are  forcibly  reminded  of  the  note  of  Erasmus  on  Eph.  v. 
32,  where  the  author's  reputation  as  a  scholar  will  not  permit  him  to 
explain  the  word  f/.u?*)^iov  so  as  to  support  the  doctrine  of  his  church, 
and  yet  he  is  too  much  shackled  by  system  or  circumstances  to  speak 
plainly  against  it.     Tr.] 


1 08   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 


CHAPTER  ^ 


HISTtiRV    OF   THE   CONDITION   OF    THE    HEBREW    TEXT.'-' 


§  92.     Change  of  the  Hebrew  Characters. 

The  characters  of  the  letters  which  Moses  used  in  writing  cannot 
be  ascertained  from  what  remains  of  antiquity,  unless  at  some  future 
time  those  stones,  on  which  Joshua  caused  the  law  to  be  engraven, 
(Jos.  viii.  30.  ss,,  comp.  Deut,  xxvii.  1.  ss.)  should  by  some  happy 
chance  be  discovered,  and  found  to  be  even  yet  legible.  By  compa- 
ring them  with  the  inscriptions  on  pieces  of  money  belonging  to  the 
Asmonaean  times,  much  information  relative  to  the  changes  of  He- 
brew writing,  highly  useful  to  criticism,  might  be  obtained.  So  long 
as  these  monuments  are  concealed,  we  must  derive  our  only  know- 
ledge of  the  subject  from  the  modern  form  of  the  characters,  from 
which  nothing  more  can  be  inferred  than  that  they  at  first  exhibited 
a  rude  dehneation  of  those  objects  which  their  names  denote. 
Comp.  my  Heb.  Gram.  Ed.  3d.  §  1,  2.  p.  1—16. The  incon- 
stancy and  mutability  of  all  human  things  will  not  suffer  us  to  doubt, 
that  this  original  form  of  the  letters  was  subjected  in  course  of  time 
to  various  changes.  This  is  proved  to  have  been  the  case  by  a  com- 
parison of  the  Hebrew^  Punic,  Samaritan,  and  Syriac  characters,  all 
of  which  were  originally  the  same,  and  yet  in  the  times  of  Jerome 
and  of  Origen,  in  the  ages  when  the  Palmyrene  inscriptions  were 
made,  and  when  the  Phcenician  and  Jewish  coins  were  stamped,  they 
differed  in  a  very  great  degree. 

*  [On  the  subjects  of  this  chapter,  see  Bauer,  ^  10—17,  p.  111—160;  EichbJ 
§  68 — 80  b ;    Gesenius  Gescbiclite  der  Hebiaeischen  Sprache   und  Schrift,  Leipz 
1815.  ^  40—57.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  109 

As  the  Hebrews  during  the  Babylonian  exile  used  the  Aramaean  dia- 
iect,  at  this  period  a  more  than  ordinary  change  of  the  characters  took 
place.  This  seems  to  have  induced  the  Rabbies  Jose  and  Zutrato  assert 
in  the  Babylonian  Talmud  (Sanhedrin  II.  p.  21.  col.  1.)  that  the  charac- 
ters which  came  into  general  use  after  the  exile,  were  introduced  by  the 
Jews  who  returned  from  Assyria,  (Babylonia,)  and  that  Ezra  wrote  out 
the  sacred  books  in  those  new  characters,  and  thus  the  old  were  left  to 
the  Samaritans.  But  not  a  few  of  the  Rabbies  in  the  Talmud  oppose 
this  assertion,  and  indeed  on  good  grounds,  since  neither  Ezra  nor  Jose- 
phus  makes  any  mention  of  this  sudden  change  ;  Origen  expresses  himself 
doubtfully  respecting  it :  Jerome*  was  the  first  who  without  hesitation 
affirmed,  that  the  Hebrew  character  in  use  at  his  time  had  been  introdu- 
ced by  Ezra.  More  modern  writers  blindly  followed  Jerome,  until  the 
opinion  was  attacked  by  CAPEL,[a]  who  was  opposed  by  very  bitter  ad- 
versaries, particularly  Bcxtgrf.  Comp.  Wolfii  Biblioth.  Heb.  Vol.  II. 
sect,  vi.  p.  419.  s.  p.  623.  Vol.  IV.  sect.  vi.  p.  227—242.  Walton  Pro- 
leg.  III.  5  29—37.  p.  103—125.  Ed.  Dathii. 

[a)  In  his  Arcanum  Punctuationis,  L.  I.  c.  6.,  and  afterwaids  in  his 
Diatriba  de  veris  et  antiquis  literis  Hebraicis,  1645,  Amsl.eiod.'\ 

§  93.     Whether  the  alphabet  of  the  Hebrews  consisted  anciently  of 
twenty-ttvo  letters. 

To  whatever  changes  the  Hebrew  characters  may  have  been  sub- 
jected during  a  long  course  of  ages,  their  number  was  not  increased. 
The  alphabetical  Psalms  (xxv.  xxxiv.  xxxvii.  cxi.  cxii.  cxix.  cxlv.) 
indicate  22,  and  consequently  these  are  ndt  more  modern  than  the 
time  of  David  ;  on  the  contrary,  as  the  very  use  made  of  them  in 
these  poems  recognizes  them  as  well  known,  they  are  of  much  higher 
antiquity  Why  not,  then,  ascribe  them  at  once  to  the  inventor  of 
the  alphabet  ?  A  person  of  a  later  age,  after  the  art  of  writing  had 
been  extended  to  many  nations,  would  not  have  been  able  to  obtrude 
upon  others,  Phoenicians,  Syiians,  and  Egyptians,  for  instance,  letters 
of  his  own  invention  ;  not  to  say,  that  grammatical  niceties  were  not 
so  much  attended  to  at  that  time  as  to  suggest  the  idea  of  increasing 
the  number  of  the  letters.  The  enlargement  of  the  Arabic  alphabet 
in  more  modern  times,  shows  that  for  this  purpose  grammarians  of 
some  skill  are  necessaiy. 

*  In  Proloff.  Galeat. 


1 10       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

It  is  said  indeed,  that  Cadmus  the  Phoenician,  1519  years  B.  C, 
and  therefore  85  after  the  exode  from  Egypt,  brought  from  Phoenicia 
into  Greece  only  sixteen  letters.  This  is  the  account  of  Pliny  and 
Plutarch.  But  almost  300  years  before,  Aristotle  speaks  of  his  hav- 
ing introduced  eighteen,  and  Herodotus,  the  most  ancient  writer,  and 
Diodorus  Siculus,  who  followed  him,  are  entirely  silent  respecting  the 
number.  These  circumstances  were  sufficient  to  induce  Dionysius 
of  Halicarnassus,  (Tom.  II.  p.  21.  Ed.  Oxon.)  to  doubt  as  to  the  pos- 
sibility of  determining  the  number  of  letters  introduced  by  Cadmus. 
But  a  comparison  of  the  Greek  characters  with  the  Oriental,  which 
I  shall  therefore  subjoin,  will  show  that  Cadmus  introduced  twenty- 
two  letters. 

A  H,  B  3,  r  J,  A  n,  E  n,  t  i,  z  t,  h  n,  0  to,  i  %  K  d,  a  S,  M  d, 

N  J,  S  D,  O ;;,  *  3,  X,  X  p,  P  *i,  2  tJ^,  T  n. 

The  letter  y  tzade  is  the  only  one  which  wants  a  corresponding 
character,  and  this  may  be  found  in  tfavTTi,  which,  as  well  as  tzade, 
designates  the  number  90.  The  Greeks  added  Psi  and  Pi,  the  latter 
of  which  was  not  used  by  the  Orientals,  as  Jerome  has  remarked,*  for 
the  Hebrew  Phe  is  never  sounded  p,  but  always  hke  the  Arabic  and 
Syriac  f.  The  Greek  writers,  therefore,  are  not  to  be  regarded  re- 
specting the  addition  of  letters,  their  declarations  on  this  subject  being 
mere  conjectures  founded  on  slight  and  uncertain  rumour.  Much 
less  are  we  to  admit  the  reasonings  of  Chishull,!  Cour  de  Gebelin,| 
and  BiANCONi,!!  who  from  coins,  in  the  inscriptions  on  which  only  six- 
teen letters  appear,  argue  that  in  the  original  Hebrew  alphabet  only 
that  number  existed.  Without  urging  that  this  is  not  supported  by 
the  fact,  and  that  we  cannot  reasonably  expect  to  meet  with  all  the 
letters  of  an  alphabet  in  a  few  words  of  inscriptions,  it  is  enough  to 
say,  that  all  the  coins  which  have  been  found  are  much  more  modern 
not  only  than  the  alphabetical  Psalms,  but  even  than  the  verses  in 
Prov.  xxxi.  10---3],  and  the  alphabetical  lamentations  of  Jeremiah, 
in  which  the  twenty-two  letters  occur.  » 

*  [Qui  Palaestini  dicuntiir  Graecis,  Hebraeis  vocantui  Philistiui,  quia  P  literi.m 
Hebraeus  non  habet.     Comment,  in  Jes.  II.] 
t  [Antiquit.  Asiatic.  ^  19.  p.  25.] 

;  (Monde  Primitif.  T.  III.  L.  V.  Sect.  II.  c.  8.  ss.  p.  411.  ss.] 
it  [Antiq.  Lit.  Heb.  ct  Graec.  p.  41.  Ed.  II.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  J  11 

^  94.     Age  of  the  Vowel  Points. 

Since  the  Jews,  although  fond  of  adhering  to  ancient  usages,  write 
their  rolls  for  the  Synagogue  service  without  vowel  points,  and  since  all 
the  manuscripts  of  the  Samaritans  are  so,  it  may  be  conjectured  that 
the  ancient  Hebrews  also  did  not  use  them.  The  more  modern  Jews 
indeed  wish  to  have  it  supposed  that  they  received  the  vowel  points 
by  tradition  from  Moses  ;  but  they  are  to  be  considered  as  referring 
to  the  manner  of  reading  the  text.  That  our  present  points  were  not 
in  existence  in  former  ages  is  proved  by  the  practice  of  the  ancient 
translators,  who  often  render  the  words  with  different  vowels.* 
Origen,  in  writing  the  Hebrew  text  in  Greek  letters  in  his  Hexapla, 
and  Jerome,  when  he  gives  the  Hebrew  words  in  Latin  letters,  fre- 
quently employ  other  vowels  than  those  which  are  indicated  by  the 
present  points.  Jerome  also,  as  well  as  the  Talmud  and  the  treatise 
Sopherim,  observes  a  profound  silence  respecting  the  points  even  in 
places,  where,  if  they  had  been  in  use,  he  could  not  have  passed  them 

over  unnoticed. 1)  Since  the  I'almud  was  completed  at  the  close 

of  the  fifth  century  and  the  treatise  Sopherim,  which  speaks  of  the 
Talmud  as  already  finished,  cannot  have  been  written  before  the  sixth 
century  ;  it  follows,  that  as  late  as  the  sixth  century  the  points  were 

unknown. 2)  But  in  the  eleventh  century,  Aaron  Ben  Asher  and 

Jacob  Ben  Naphtah  devoted  all  their  attention  to  pointing  the  text  pro- 
perly, and  giving  a  judgment  on  the  variations  of  different  copies ; 
whence  it  is  clear,  that  in  their  day  our  present  system  had  already 

been  some  time  in  use. 3)  The  punctuation  system  displays  so 

much  care  and  is  so  artificially  constructed,  that  it  could  not  possibly 
have  been  brought  to  such  a  height  of  perfection  in  a  short  time. 
Besides,  in  the  comparison  of  the  eastern  and  western  texts,  which 
was  probably  made  in  the  eighth  century,  two  various  readings  occa- 
sioned by  different  methods  of  punctuation  occur.  We  shall  not 
therefore  greatly  err  by  coming  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  present 
system  of  punctuation  began  in  the  seventh  or  eighth  century,  and 
was  brought  to  perfection  during  the  ninth  and  tenth. 

*  [See  the  Germ.  Introd.  p.  332,  and  Capelli.  Crit,  Sac.  T.  II.  L.  IV.  c.  2  §  3—29, 
p.  502—545.  L.  V.  c.  2.  §  2.  p.  772—779,  and  c,  4.  §  1—9,  p.  805—821.  c.  8.  «  1—8. 
I).  858—869.] 


112        GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKSi 

§  95.     Whether  the  letters  'inx  were  formerly  vowels. 

Jerome  does  indeed  frequently  say,  that  the  Hebrews  very  rarely 
make  use  of  vowel  letters  in  the  middle.*  But  he  is  not  speaking  of 
the  matres  lectioais  or  the  letters  "'iriN,  because  among  these  vowel 

letters  he  reckons  Cheth  and  Ayin,  (See  Praef.  ad  Comment,  in  Amos., 
and  de  Nomin.  Heb.;)  and  in  another  place  he  says  that  the  Hebrews 
have  no  vowels  in  the  middle.!  They  are  quite  mistaken  therefore 
who  infer  from  hence,  that  the  letters  "inx  were  the  vowels  of  the 

■cf 

ancient  Hebrews,  and  of  more  frequent  occurrence  than  at  present 
in  the  text,  whence  the  greater  part  of  them  were  stricken  out,  upon 
the  invention  of  the  points.  Nor  indeed  is  it  easy  to  conceive  that 
these  letters  supplied  the  places  of  the  vowels,  since  He  is  rarely  a 
mater  lectionis,  (being  so  only  when  it  terminates  the  second  person 
of  pronouns  and  of  singular  verbs  in  the  preterite;)  Aleph  takes  all 
the  vowels  ;  Vau  and  Jod  when  quiescent  lengthen  the  syllable,  and 
fall  away  when  it  is  shortened.     Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  p.  338,  339. 

§  96.     Whether  the  ancient  Hebrews  had  no  vowel  signs. 

Although  the  ancient  Hebrews  did  not  use  either  our  points,  or 
the  quiescent  letters  as  vowels,  yet  words,  the  pronunciation  of  which 
is  not  accurately  determined  by  means  of  the  series  of  discourse,  seem 
to  have  required  some  sign  to  suggest  it  to  the  reader  ;  and  thus  the 
Arabians,  although  they  write  without  points,  constantly  add  some 
vowel  mark  to  ambiguous  words. — The  Syrians  did  actually  in  the 
sixth  century  transmit  to  the  Arabians  not  only  their  twenty-two  con- 
sonants, but  also  three  vowel  signs,  to  which  in  the  eighth  century 
they  added  two  others. — Three  marks  of  this  description,  annexed  to 
the  letters,  are  found  also  in  the  Chaldee  writing  of  the  Mendaeans  in 
Mesopotamia  at  Mardin.«— Ephraem  the  Syrian,  (T.  I.Opp.  p.  184.), 
by  remarking  that  he  had  never  found  the  word  chomre,  but  always 
chemre,  intimates  the  presence  of  some  vowel  mark,  for  without  one 
X'lDn  might  be  read  either  way.  Hence  it  may  be  inferred,  that  as 
early  as  the  fourth  century  the  Syrians  had,  if  not  the  three  vowel 

*  [Vocalibus  iu  medio  Uteris  perraro  wti.] 
!  fNon  habere  in  medio  rocales.] 


♦ 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  113 

signs  used  in  the  sixth  century,  at  least  some  sign  of  pronunciation^ 
and  without  doubt  that  point  which  is  seen  not  only  in  Syriac  manu- 
scripts destitute  of  the  vowel  points,  but  also  together  with  those 
points  in  many  printed  books,  and  which  is  treated  of  by  Amira 
(Grammat.  Syr.  Romce,  1596,  L.  I.  c.  16,  17,  p.  51 — 54.)  as  a  mark 
to  direct  the  reading,  indicating  the  pronunciation  by  its  different  posi- 
tion. This  simplest  sign  of  pronunciation  is  also  undoubtedly  the 
most  ancient,  being  observable  even  among  the  characters  inscribed 
on  the  ligatures  of  Egyptian  mummies. 

This,  however,  does  not  yet  prove  that  the  ancient  Hebrews  also 
employed  a  similar  mark  to  indicate  the  pronunciation  of  ambiguous 
words.  Jerome  seems  indeed  to  favour  this  opinion  by  frequently 
mentioning  the  accent  by  which  the  pronunciation  was  prescribed  ; 
but  a  comparison  of  all  the  passages  in  his  writings  will  show,  that 
under  the  term  accent  he  expresses  the  aspiration  of  the  guttural 
letters,  the  sibilant  sound  made  by  the  pronunciation  of  Shin  and 
Tzade,  and  even  the  quantity  of  syllables,  and  that  all  these  particu- 
lars may  be  referred  to  pronunciation,  especially  since  he  affirms  the 
vowel  sign  to  be  often  absent,  [a]  But  if  those  places  of  Jerome  be 
examined  in  which  he  says  that  the  Hpbrfiws  do  not  have  vowels  in  the 
middle,  and  that  they  very  rarely  make  use  of  vowel  letters  in  the 
middle,  it  will  be  clear  that  he  intimates,  that  above  or  below  the 
letters  certain  marks  were  used.  These,  as  they  might  convey  the 
sound  of  i  or  e,  or  o,  or  u,  did  not  determine  the  vowels  with  accu- 
racy, and  were  similar  to  those  vowel  pomts,  which  in  the  6th  cen- 
tury the  Arabians  received  from  the  Syrians.  And  that  certain 
marks  of  this  kind  were  introduced  he  shows  more  clearly  on  Gen. 
xix.  33,  where  he  says  of  the  word  riDlp::,  "  they  place  a  point  above, 
as  if  something  incredible  were  related  ;"*  in  which  words  he  inti- 
mates the  pointing  noip3,  referring  to  the  point  above  the  i  preserved 
in  our  present  punctuation  with  a  marginal  note.  Besides  the  vowel 
point  in  the  l  for  u,  Jerome  must  therefore  have  had  also  the  upper 
'  one  to  suggest  the  supposed  incredibility  ;  and  thus  it  is  evident  that  in 
his  time  the  points  cholem  and  shurek  were  in  use,  whence  it  may  be 
teasonably  inferred,  that  a  point  below  the  letter  was  also  used  for  i 

'*■  [Appingunt  desuper,  quasi  incredibile  quid,  quod  reium  natura  non  capiat,  coire 
'luempiam  nescientem.] 

In 


114      GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

and  e,  so  that  when  there  was  no  point  a  was  to  be  sounded.  These 
points  are  referred  to  in  places  of  the  Talmud,  where  mention  is 
made  of  the  accents  U'D]}a  and  D'WD  as  signs  of  pronunciation,  as  in 

Berachoth,  p.  14,  c.  1 . ;  Nedarim,  p.  37.  c.  2.,  p.  52.  c.  1. ;  Sanhedrin, 
p.  4.  c.  1.  ♦ 

In  the  time  of  Jerome  therefore,  one  point  seems  to  have  occupied 
two  positions  ;  one  above  the  letter,  denoting  o  and  u,  which  how- 
ever, when  intended  to  express  u,  the  mater  lectionis,  vau,  being  pre- 
sent, was  written  in  the  middle  of  that  letter  ;  and  another  below  the 
letter  denoting  i  and  e.  To  these  was  added,  perhaps  in  the  5th  or 
6th  century,  a  mark  for  a.  It  was  only  to  ambiguous  words,  how- 
ever, that  these  marks  were  appended.  These  three  signs  which  are 
the  ground-work  of  our  present  punctuation,  were  at  length,  in  the 
two  or  three  subsequent  centuries,  increased  and  reduced  to  the 
modern  system. 

The  Protestants,  who  defended  the  perfect  perspicuity  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, contended  even  until  the  middle  of  the  18th  century,  that  our 
vowel  points  are  coeval  with  the  consonants,  lest  indeed  the  Scripture 
should  formerly  have  been  less  clear.  But  since  they  have  rejected  this  ♦ 
opinion,  they  agree  with  us  that  the  points  are  only  a  commentary  of  the  ' 
middle  age,  and  that  exegetical  reasons  give  the  interpreter  a  right  of 
attaching  to  the  words  other  points  better  adapted  to  the  discourse.  But 
no  slight  reasons  are  sufficient  to  authorize  this  prosedure ;  for  in  our 
present  points  much  exists  which  is  derived  from  those  very  ancient 
marks  which  are  indicative  of  the  reading,  and  in  those  changes  of  the 
points  which  learned  men  have  undertaken  to  make,  so  many  instances  of 
errors  are  to  be  found,  that  an  interpreter  ought  to  be  very  cautious  and 
circumspect. 

[a)  See  Comment,  in  Jer.  i.  11.,  in  Jon.  iii.,in  Ezek.  xxvii.  28.,  Epist. 
ad  Evag.  126,  p.  570.  T.  II.  Ed,  Martian,,  Quaest.  in  Gen.  ii.  23.,  Comment.  \ 
in  Amos,  viii.,  Qusest.  in  Gen.  xli.  29.,  Comment,  in  Ep.  ad  Tit.  iii. 
Quaest.  in  Gen.  xv.  11.,  Comment,  in  Hos.  iv.,  or  Germ.  Introd.  p.  343- 
346.] 

§  97.     Age  of  the  accents  and  other  diacritical  marJcs. 

What  has  been  said  respecting  the  vowel  points  is  applicable  alsc 
to  the  accents  and  other  diacritical  marks,  namely,  Raphe,  DageshJ 
Makkeph,  Mappik,  Phsik,  and  the  point  by  which  Shin  is  distinguish! 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  115 

ed  from  Sin,  for  the  following  reasons.  1 )  The  accents  and  other 
diacritical  marks  are  closely  connected  with  the  vowel  points,  varia- 
tions in  the  former  producing  corresponding  changes  in  the  latter ; 
from  which  it  is  evident  that  both  have  a  common  origin. 2)  An- 
cient translators  have  very  often  differed  from  the  interpunctions 
which  are  indicated  by  our  accents  and  give  the  best  sense  ;  which 
they  would  not  have  done,  if  they  had  had  these  marks  of  interpunc- 

tion  in  the  text. 3)  Jerome  and  the  Talmudic  writers  are  silent 

respecting  the  accents  and  all  the  diacritical  signs,  although  they 
were  not  without  occasions  of  mentioning  them. 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  accent  which  is  mentioned  by  Jerome 
and  the  Talmudists,  is  not  a  mark  of  the  tone  and  of-interpunction, 
but  indicates  the  whole  method  of  pronouncing.  Yet  it  cannot  be 
denied,  that  sometimes  under  the  term  accent  interpunction  is  also 
denoted,  as  in  the  treatise  Hagiga,  p.  2.,  on  the  passage  in  Exod. 
xxiv.  5.,  and  in  Jerome,  Ep.  ad  Cyprian,  on  Ps.  xc.  11.  ;  but  it  can- 
not be  concluded  from  this  that  our  accents  were  written  to  the  text: 
all  that  can  be  inferred  is,  that  the  mark  to  which  the  term  accent 
was  applied,  and  which  indicated  many  things  of  different  character, 
was  sometimes  also  a  mark  of  interpunction,  v/hich,  as  I  have  shown 
at  large  in  ray  German  Introduction,  p.  352,  was  by  no  means  un- 
known to  the  ancients. 

As  early  as  the  17th  century  some  authors  conjectured  that  our  ac- 
cents were  formerly  musical  notes,  according  to  wliich  the  Psalms  were 
chanted  in  the  temple,  and  that  after  this  use  of  them  wa^  abolished  they 
were  changed  into  signs  of  interpunction,  and  introduced  also  into  other 
books.  But  we  have  already  seen  that  they  are  not  of  so  great  antiqui- 
ty, and  even  in  the  present  day  they  are  used  by  the  singers  in  Syna- 
gogues as  musical  notes,  so  that  this  use  of  them  would  never  have  been 
abolished.  Comp.  Walton,  Prol.  III.  5  45.  p.  142.  ss.  \  56.  p.  169. 
ss.[a] 

[c)  In  Bartolocci,  Biblioth.  Rab.  Tom.  IV.  p.  429 — 441,  the  accents 
are  exhibited  in  musical  notes.     Tr.] 

§  98.     Intervals  between  the  words. 
It  has  been  the  common  opinion  of  the  learned  since  Muret,*  Jus- 

*  [Remarks  on  Seneca,  Ep.  40.  7?o»7.  1585.] 


116   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

tus  Lipsius*  and  Morin,t  that  previously  to  the  9th  century  the 
ancients  wrote  without  any  spaces  between  the  words.  But  more 
modern  writers  on  ancient  documents  have  produced  many  speci- 
mens, both  Greek  and  Latin,  which  do  exhibit  such  spaces.  See 
Germ.  Introd.  p.  358,  359.  Our  present  concern,  however,  is  not 
with  these,  but  with  oriental  writings.  But  in  the  Vatican  hbrary, 
in  the  Medicean,  in  that  of  St.  Augustin  called  Angelica,  and  in  that 
at  Milan,  Syriac  manuscripts  of  the  6tk,  Itk  and  Stk  centuries  are 
preserved,  which  have  intervals  between  the  words.  There  are  ex- 
tant also  Arabic  inscriptions  and  other  monuments  of  the  same  lan- 
guage in  the  Cufic  character,  together  with  the  inscriptions  at  Per- 
sepolis  ;  in  all  of  which,  intervals  between  the  words  are  observed. 
See  Adlers  Beschreib.  der  Syrischen  Uebersetzungen  des  N.  T.  ; 
Ol.  Gekhard  Tyschen's  plates  in  his  Elementare  Syriacum  ;  Blan- 
CHIJNI  Evangeliariuiij  Quadruplex,  P.  T.  p.  541  ;  Niebuhes  Beschrei- 
bung  von  Arabien,  S.  95,  Kupfert.  iv — xi,  und  Reisebeschr.  II.  Th. 
S.  152,  Kupfert.  xxx. 

In  treating  of  oriental  writings,  Greek  and  Latin  documents  des- 
titute of  spaces  between  the  words,  might  properly  be  neglected. 
Still  it  may  be  observed,  that  there  are  extant  in  those  languages 
some  very  ancient  documents,  written  \vith  intervals ;  so  that  the 
omission  of  them  in  others  is  to  be  imputed  to  the  neghgence  or  haste 
of  the  transcribers.  This  appears  from  monuments  which  sometimes 
have  the  intervals  in  the  wrong  place,  as  in  that  inscription  of  Her- 
culaneum,  us  Ivrfo  (pov,  instead  of  ug  Iv  tf(ypov  :  Le  Pitture  antiche 
d'Erculano,  1760,  Tab.  vi.  p.  34.  Not.  2.  If  this  has  happened  in 
sculpture,  who  can  doubt,  that  transcribers  of  manuscripts  much 
oftener  left  intervals  in  improper  places  or  neglected  them  altoge- 
ther. Hence  may  be  explained  the  direction  in  the  Masora,  to 
separate  in  eleven  places  the  letters  which  constitute  one  word,  into 
two,  and  in  nine  others  to  combine  those  which  are  divided,  into  one. 
And  hence  also  we  may  discover  the  reason  why  the  ancient  transla- 
tors occasionally  made  a  division  of  the  words  different  from  the  com- 
mon one,  which  they  would  have  done  much  more  frequently,  if  their  j 
manuscripts  had  been  entirely  without  intervals  between  the  words. 

*  [Senecae  Opera,  Ep.  40,  p.  452,  453.  Ed.  Antwerp.  1652.] 
+  fExercitat.  Bib.  L.  II.  Exerc.  xvii.  c.  l.J 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  H7 

§  99.     Divisioninto  verses. [a] 

Any  one  may  readily  perceive  that  the  sacred  writers  did  not  divide 
their  books  into  small  portions,  such  as  our  verses,  which  were  not 
used  in  the  time  of  the  ancients,  as  is  proved  by  their  versions, 
wherein  a  different  division,  sometimes  better  and  sometimes  worse, 
is  frequently  observed.  Since  these  small  sections  are  intimately 
connected  with  the  accents  and  vowel  points,  it  may  be  inferred  that 
they  were  contemporaneously  introduced.  For  these  verses  are  al- 
together different  from  the  hemistichs  of  poems,  which  originated 
from  the  respective  authors,  and  are  retained  in  the  songs  in  Exod. 
XV,  Deut.  xxxii,  Jud.  v.,  and  in  the  more  ancient  manuscripts  of  Job, 
the  Psalms  and  the  Proverbs.  See  Stark,  Proleg.  in  Psalm  T,  II. 
P.  II.  Sect.  14.,  who  says,  that  "  in  proportion  to  the  antiquity  of 
the  Hebrew  manuscripts,  does  the  manner  of  writing  by  verses  pre- 
vail in  the  poetical  books."  Comp.  Kenntcott,  Diss.  I.  On 
the  state  of  the  Hebrew  Text.  p.  324,  424,  566.  The  ancients 
attest  that  the  same  method  of  writing  was  followed  in  Eccle- 
siastes  and  the  Canticles.  See  Jerome  Praef.  in  Jes.,  Epiph.  de 
Pond,  et  Mens.  c.  4.,  Cyrill  op  Jerus.  Cataches.  IV.  The  same 
arrangement,  as  Jerome  in  his  Praef.  in  Jes.  et  Ezek.  declares,  was  at 
length  applied  to  the  prose  compositions,  and  books  which  were 
written  in  this  way  were  called  g'l'xri^sis,  because  they  were  divided 
g'i-)(r)gug,  or  by  riX*"'  that  is  verses.  But  the  r>X°'»  ^s  we  learn  from 
Jerome,  Praef.  I.  in  Job,  were  distinguished  into  two  kinds,  the 
smaller  or  cola,  and  the  larger  or  commata.  These  distinctions 
which  appear  to  be  what  is  meant  by  the  D'tD^r  and  D*'piD3  of  the  Tal- 

mudists,  (Tract.  Megilloth  c.  4.,  and  Massecheth  c.  4.),  had  re- 
ference to  the  sense  ;[6]  short  sentences  and  members  of  sentences, 
completed  in  one  line,  being  called  cola,  and  full  periods  and  parts 
somewhat  long,  commata.  Whatever  the  truth  may  be,  it  is  beyond 
all  doubt  that  all  these  ancient  divisions  were  entirely  different  from 
our  verses.  Comp.  De  Rossi,  Specimen  Lect.  variantium  V.  F.  in 
Append,  p.  399—440,  Simon  Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  L.  v.  ch.  28. 

[a)  Comp.  Prideaux  Connexions,  Part.  I.  B.  V.  anno  446.  Vol.  I. 
pp.  334.  ss.    De  Wette,  Einleit.  b  77.     7V.1 


118    GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO    THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

[b)  Thus  Jerome,  Praef.  in  Ezek.  "  Legite  igitur  et  hunc  juxta 
translationem  aostram,  quoniam  per  cola  scriptus  et  commata,  manifes- 
tiorem  legentibus  sensum  tribuit  "] 

§  100.     Division  of  the  Pentateuch  into  Pharashioth. 

The  Pentateuch  is  divided  into  fifty  and  also  into  fifty-four  Phara- 
shioth, nvK'iS,  in  order  that  whether  the  year  be  a  simple  lunar  year 

or  intercalated,  one  Pharasha,  ntyia,  may  be  read  in  the  Synagogues, 

every  week,  and  the  whole  Pentateuch  in  the  course  of  the  year.  The 
Pharashioth  are  indicated  by  333  or  ODD.  These  longer  weekly  por- 
tions are  subdivided  into  smaller,  which  are  read  every  day  in  the 
Synagogue  by  different  men ;[«]  and  these  divisions  are  designated 
by  3  or  D.  By  these  letters  transcribers  are  directed  to  begin  with  a 
new  line  after  333  and  3,  (which  stand  for  nnin3,  open,  denoting  that 

the  remainder  of  the  line  is  to  be  blank,)  and  after  ODD  or  D  (which 
stand  for  nnino  or  riDiOD,  shut,  denoting  that  the  line  is  not  to  be 

blank,)  to  continue  the  line,  after  leaving  a  considerable  interval. 
This  division  is  mentioned  in  the  Treatise  Sopherim,  of  the  sixth  or 
seventh  century,  and  seems  to  have  come  down  from  the  time  when 
after  the  return  from  captivity  the  reading  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the 
Synagogues  was  established.  For  a  long  period,  however,  the  por- 
tion to  be  read  appears  to  have  been  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  ruler 
of  the  Synagogue,  until  at  length  the  presiding  ofiicers  determined 
upon  a  permanent  division  into  parts  for  reading.  This  gave  rise  to 
different  divisions,  of  which  Maimonides  complained;  at  last  all 
agreed  in  one  of  most  celebrity,  which  is  admitted  into  our  Bibles. 

[a)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  79.  anm.  c,  denies  that  this  opinion,  (which 
is  also  maintained  by  Bertholdt,  S.  202.)  has  any  foundation.  He  re- 
fers for  another  view  of  the  subject  to  Bdxtorf,  Synagoga  Judaica,  c. 
xvi.  p.  327.  ss.     TV.] 

§  101.     The  Haphtaroth. 

In  the  Synagogue  service  there  is  read  also  every  Sabbath  a  portion 
of  the  Prophets,  which  is  called  Haphtara,  nil33n.[aj     The  Haphta- 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  1 19 

roth  are  selections  taken  fi-om  the  Prophets,  and  written  out  by  them- 
selves in  manuscripts.  Their  number  is  the  same  as  that  of  the 
Pharashioth. — Whether  the  origin  of  the  practice  of  reading  certain 
portions  from  the  prophets  is  to  be  sought  for  in  the  age  of  the  Mac- 
cabees, as  is  the  opinion  of  Ehas  Levita.  (in  Thisbi.  sub.  voce  "<D3,) 
and  of  Vitruiga  (de  Synagoga  Vet.  L.  III.  P.  II.  p.  1008,)  is  unde- 
termined. It  is  certain  from  Luke  iv.  16  ss.,  that  it  was  usual  to  read 
the  prophets  in  the  Synagogues  in  the  age  of  Jesus  ;  but  the  choice 
of  the  prophet  to  be  read  appears  to  have  been  left  to  the  pleasure  of 
the  ruler  of  the  Synagogue.  For  the  passage  in  Luke  iv.  16.  from 
Isa.  Ixi.  1 — 3.,  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  modern  Haphtaroth,  and 
therefore  the  determination  of  particular  portions  seems  to  have  been 
the  work  of  a  more  modern  age. 

Elias  traces  the  reading  of  the  prophets  to  the  prohibition  of  the 
reading  of  the  law,  by  Antiochus.  But  as  the  purpose  of  this  monarch 
was  completely  to  destroy  Judaism,  his  prohibition  undoubtedly  was 
intended  to  include  the  prophets  also.  Vitringa's  opinion  is  much 
more  probable,  that  after  the  Jews  had  re-estabhshed  their  state  by 
means  of  the  Maccabees,  they  sought  to  improve  the  character  of 
their  worship  by  adding  a  portion  from  the  prophets  to  that  from  the 
law,  which  had  been  formerly  read.  Comp.  Carpz.  Crit.  Sac.  L.  I, 
C.  4.  §  4.  p.  147—149. 

[a)    Haphtara,  m£33n-.   the  dismission,  from   1£33,  to  dismiss ;  so 

called  because  this  is  the  last  lesson,  and  immediately  precedes  the  dis- 
mission of  the  people;  on  which  account  also  the  reader  of  the  Haph- 
tara is  called  T'DSDi   the  dismisser.  Comp.  Buxt.  Lex.  Chal.  et  Talm, 

in  103  Col.  1719,  Vitringa  de  Syn.  Vet.  Lib.  III.  Pars.  11.  Cap.  x. 

p.  993.  6s.     Leusdew  Philolog.  Hebr.  p.  38.— TV.] 

§  102.     Division  into  Chapters. 

The  division  into  chapters  was  introduced  into  our  Vulgate  in  the 
thirteenth  century,  on  occasion  of  the  composition  of  a  concordance, 
in  order  that  places  might  be  cited  with  accuracy,  and  easily  found. 
For  this  reason,  also,  every  chapter  (for  the  verses  were  first  introdu^ 


120  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

ced  into  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and  numbered,  by  Robert  Stephens,  in 
1548,)  was  subdivided  into  smaller  parts  by  the  letters  A.  B.  C.  D. 
&c.  disposed  according  to  a  certain  number  of  lines,  that  a  passage 
marked  in  the  concordance  might  be  found  without  any  labour.  It  is 
scarcely  possible  to  determine,  whether  this  division  owes  its  origin 
to  Stephen  Langton,  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  or  to  Hugo  a  S.  Caro, 
the  former  of  whom  died  in  1227  and  the  latter  in  1262.  Perhaps 
the  «livision  into  chapters  originated  with  Stephen,  and  was  after- 
wards somewhat  altered  by  Hugh  ;  this  will  account  for  the  varieties 
which  even  now  are  to  be  seen  in  different  editions.  One  thing  is 
certain,  that  from  the  year  1 240,  citations  are  made  by  a  reference  to 
chapters.  See  Genebkard,  Chronol.  L.  IV.  p.  644.  This  division 
was  first  introduced  into  the  Hebrew  Bible  by  Rabbi  Isaac  Nathan 
in  1440,  (See  Buxt.  Concord.  Bib.  Heb.  1633.  Praef.  col.  4—14.) 
and  hence  it  passed  into  the  edition  of  Daniel  Bomberg,  1625. 

Jerome,  Comment,  in  Mich.  vi.  9.,  Sophon.  iii.  14.,  Jer.  ix.  22., 
Qusest.  in  Gen.  xxxvi.  1 4,  and  elsewhere,  speaks  of  chapters  in  the 
Hebrew  text  and  in  the  Alexandrine  translation.  But  they  are  entirely 
different  from  our  divisions  into  chapters,  and  perhaps  they  are  the 
same  as  the  Siderlm,  Q'''\~\D,  which  Jacob  Ben  Chajim  found  in  a  manu- 
script of  Genesis,  amounting  to  forty -two,  and  which  are  mentioned 
also  in  the  Paris  Correctorium  of  the  twelfth  century.  The  ancient 
ecclesiastical  writers  never  designate  places  of  the  Bible  by  chapters  ; 
the  Jews  denominated  portions  of  considerable  extent  from  the  name 
of  some  person,  place,  or  thing,  mentioned  therein,  nearly  in  the  same 
manner  as  the  Mahommedans  do  the  Suras  of  the  Koran.  Thus 
Philo,  de  Agric.  T.  1.  p.  316,  Edit.  Mangey,  cites  a  passage  £v  Taig 
ams,  in  the  curses,  meaning  Deut.  xxvii ;  Rashi  on  Hos.  ix.  1 9.  this 
is  Gibean  of  Benjamin,  wirfQ^^  in  the  concubine,  that  is,  in  Jud.  xix — 

xxi.,  and  on  Ps.  ii.,  as  it  is  said  1J3X2  in  Abner,  meaning  II  Sam. 

ii.  8 — iii.  39.;  Abenezra  on  Hos.  iv.   8.  "'"7^3,  in  Eli,  that  is,  in 

I  Sam.  i. — iv.  The  same  mode  of  quotation  occurs  in  Mark  xii.  26. 
£*i  TTjg  ^aT!5,  in  the  bush,  that  is,  in  Exod.  ii — iv.,  Comp.  Luke  xx.  37.; 
in  Mark  ii.  26.  sv  AQiaddg,  in  Abiathar,  that  is,  I.  Sam.  xxi. — xxii.; 
alsp  in  Rom.  xi.  2.  sv  EXia,  in  Elias,  or  I  Kings  xvii-^xix. 


i 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  121 

Although  the  division  into  our  chapters  and  verses  does  afford  the  ad- 
vantage of  citing  any  places  with  accuracy,  and  of  finding  them  readily, 
yet  it  is  accompanied  by  a  great  inconvenience,  the  series  of  discourse 
being  withdrawn  from  the  reader's  attention  by  an  improper  division, 
or  by  the  want  of  one  where  it  ought  to  have  been  introduced.  The  in- 
terpreter therefore  may  disregard  these  divisions,  and  it  would  be  desira- 
ble in  new  editions  of  the  Bible  to  adopt  others  of  a  more  suitable  kind, 
and  to  note  the  former  chapters  and  verses  in  the  margin  at  the  end  of  the 
lines,  for  the  convenience  of  turning  to  quotations  and  finding  them  with 
€ase.     Thus  the  series  of  discourse  would  not  be  interrupted. 


§  103.     Division  of  the  booJcs  of  the  Old  Testament,  [d] 

The  books  of  the  Old  Testament  have  been  distributed  into  three 
classes,   the   law-,  niir^n,    the  prophets,  o'N'ajn,  and   the  writings, 

D'3!in3n,  emphatically  so  called,  which  we  are  accustomed  to  desig- 
nate by  the  term  Hagiographa.  This  division  is  employed  as  well 
known  and  in  common  use,  not  only  by  Josephus,  Philo,  and  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament,  but  also  by  the  translator  of  Eccle- 
siasticus  in  the  Prologue,  131  B.  C,  and  it  seems  to  have  descended 
from  that  age  in  which  the  canon  was  fixed.  In  course  of  time, 
however,  the  arrangement  of  the  books  in  the  second  and  third 
classes  underwent  some  change,  for  Josephus  reckons  13  prophets 
and  4  Hagiographa  ;  but  the  Talmudists  who  extended  the  number 
of  the  books  to  24,  removed  6  books  of  the  second  class  into  the 
third,  and  consequently  they  reckon  1 1  Hagiographa  and  8  prophets. 
This  order  is  preserved  in  our  Bibles,  in  wliich  also  four  prophets, 
that  is  to  say,  the  books  of  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel  and  Kings,  are 
called  first  or  former,  D"'3il2'N"i,  and  the  remaining  four,  Isaiah,  Jere- 
miah, Ezekiel  and  the  book  of  the  12  minor  prophets,  the  latter, 
D'Jnnx.     In  our  Bibles  the  third  class  contains  the  Psalms,  Proverbs, 

Job,  Canticles,  Ruth,  Lamentations,  Ecclesiastes,  Esther,  Daniel, 
Ezra  and  Nehemiah,  and  the  Chronicles.  The  formation  of  another 
class  of  books  under  the  name  of  the  Jive  rolls,  m'?JD,  including  Ruth, 

Esther,  Canticles,  Lamentations,  and  Ecclesiastes,  is  more  modern, 
but  of  what  particular  age  is  unknown.     It  originated  fi-om  the  read- 

16 


*• 


122      GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 
ing  of  those  books  in  the  Synagogues  on  certain  festivals,  for  which 
purpose  they  were  transcribed  in  a  separate  volume.     Comp.  Stokb 
I  Neues  Repertorium  fur  Bibl.  und  Morgenl.  Lxtt.  von  PAr.rs,  II. 

Th.  S.  225—247. 

fa)  Comp.  5  1.  of  this  part.     AIso.De  Wette,  Eii^eit.  §  10.   Pri- 
^KA^TX,  Connexion,  Part  I.  B.  V.  anno  446.  Vol.  1.  pp.  331.  ss.    3V.] 


m 

OP   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  123 

CHAPTER  VI. 


HISTORY  OF  THE    HEBREW   TEXT.[a] 


§  104.     The  text  is  by  no  means  free  from  errors. 

Although  the  Hebrew  text,  as  has  been  already  shown  (§  12,  13.). 
has  not  been  corrupted ;  yet  it  has  been  impossible  to  preserve  it 
entirely  free  from  faults.  If  all  the  transcribers  had  been  learned, 
critical  and  attentive,  still  they  could  not  have  avoided  errors.  Of 
•  these  errors  some  at  least  would  give  a  meaning,  and  therefore  in- 
stead of  being  corrected  would  be  transcribed,  so  that  at  length 
manuscripts  every  where  would  differ,  and  the  reader  after  some 
time  be  unable  to  determine  the  genuine  reading  from  the  erroneous. 
In  other  words,  various  readings  would  arise  :  and  very  many  have 
been  collected  by  a  comparison  of  ancient  versions,  of  passages  cited 
by  ancient  writers,  of  manuscript  copies,  and  of  modern  editions. 
Most  of  these  indeed  are  of  very  little  moment,  but  there  are  some 
which  entirely  alter  the  sense  in  places  of  great  importance,  so  that 
they  ought  by  no  means  to  be  neglected  by  the  theologian. 

The  Jews,  with  the  exception  of  the  few  who  have  compared  manuscripts, 
deny  the  existence  of  various  readings.  The  Catholic  clergy  on  the  other 
hand,  have  always  admitted  them,  and  indeed  in  their  zeal  for  the  repu- 
tation of  the  Vulgate,  they  have  sometimes  extended  the  number  and 
importance  of  textuary  errors  further  than  is  necessary.  The  Jews 
were  supported  by  the  Protestants,  with  the  view  of  defending  their 
doctrine  of  the  perspicuity  of  Scripture,  At  last,  however,  about 
the  middle  of  the  18th  century,  the  latter  began,  principally  by  the 
agency  of  John  David  Michaelis,  with  immense  labour  to  consult 
manuscripts,  to  collect  and  examine  various  readings.  Those  who 
previously  to  this  time  had  defended  the  existence  of  various  read- 
ings had  made  but  little  progress.    Lewis  Capel  is  the  most  distinguish- 


\ 


124     GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

ed.  For  ten  years  he  was  prevented  from  printing  his  Critica  Sacra,  and 
it  was  published  at  last  by  his  son,  who  had  become  a  convert  to  the 
Catholic  church.  It  was  very  severely  attacked  by  many,  and  especially 
by  the  Buxtorfs,  both  father  and  son.  See  Kennicott  On  the  State 
of  the  Hebrew  Text,  Diss.  I.  Part  ii.  pp.  279.  ss.  Walton,  Proleg. 
VII.  p.  240.  Seq.  De  Rossi  Lect.  Var.  V.  T.  Praef.  T.  I.  {  34.  Rosen- 
MUELLER  Handbuch  fiir  die  Liter,  der  bib.  Krit.  und  Ex  eg.  Bd.I.  S.  439 
—608.  Capel.  Crit.  Sac.  T.  II.  L.  vi.  c.  3.  p.  932—937. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  Chapter,  compare  Bauer,  J  25 — 34.  p. 
195—234.     Tr.] 

§  105.     History  of  the  text  until  the  Ahxandnne  version  was  made. 

Respecting  the  errors  which  had  crept  into  the  Hebrew  text  pre- 
viously to  the  third  century  before  Christ,  we  have  scarcely  any  in- 
formation. But  it  is  not  therefore  to  be  apprehended,  that  their 
number  and  importance  were  so  great  as  to  have  produced  any 
changes  affecting  its  identity  and  genuineness.  For  if,  during  the 
long  period  of  time  which  elapsed  between  the  third  century  before 
Christ  and  the  invention  of  printing,  no  such  evil  took  place,  it  is  much 
less  probable  that  this  should  have  been  the  case  during  that  shorter 
interval  which  extended  from  the  age  of  the  authors  to  the  third  cen 
tury  before  Christ.  This  wiU  appear  more  clearly  if  it  be  considered, 
that  in  those  old  times  books  were  but  seldom  transcribed,  and  that 
mistakes  and  errors  committed  by  copyists  in  a  language  which  was 
then  vernacular,  would  be  the  more  readily  observed  and  could  h 
corrected  with  the  more  certainty,  and  that  the  correction  of  manu- 
scripts would  be  made  with  the  more  caution  because  the  most  exaci 
copies  were  the  most  carefiiUy  sought  for.  That  great  care  wi 
taken  in  correcting  manuscripts  recently  transcribed,  is  confirmed  by  th( 
practice  which  prevails  in  eastern  countries  even  in  our  o^vn  time,  as  W( 
learn  from  Alexander  Russel,  in  his '  State  of  Learning  at  Aleppo,'  whos 
statement  has  been  confirmed  to  me  by  the  oral  testimony  of  Aryda. 
The  transcriber  reads  over  the  newly  made  copy  before  a  coUectioi 
of  learned  men,  each  of  whom  follows  the  reader  with  his  own  cop; 
of  the  same  book,  carefully  examining  whether  what  is  read  agrei 
with  it.     As  soon  as  any  disagreement  is  perceived,  the  reader  stop 

*  [A  learned  Marbnite  resident  in  Vienna  at  the  time  that  this  work  was  writt 
Germ.  Introd.  Th.  I.  S.  37.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  J  25 

and  a  discussion  respecting  the  genuine  reading  takes  place,  which 
is  sometimes  sharp  and  of  long  continuance. — It  is  quite  evident 
then,  that  the  number  of  various  readings  of  importance  could  not 
very  greatly  increase. 

With  respect  to  more  ancient  variations  of  the  text,  all  that  we 
know  of  them  relates  to  places  which  occur  twice.  All  the  dis- 
crepancies of  such,  however,  must  not  be  referred  to  the  class  of 
various  readings  ;  for  many  may  have  arisen  from  a  second  and 
more  polished  edition  made  by  the  author  himself-  as  Ps.  xviii.  and 
II  Sam.  xxii.  ;  or  the  author  who  borrowed  the  plan  from  some 
other  book,  may  have  made  some  changes,  as  is  the  case  perhaps 
with  Isa.  ii.  24.  and  Mic.  iv.  1 — 3.  See  Vogel  in  his  edition  of 
Capel's  Critica  Sacra,  T.  I.  L.  I.  c.  3.  p.  31 — 45.  In  the  alphabet- 
ical Psalms  sometimes  members  or  words  are  wanting,  which  can- 
not be  found  in  any  manuscript,  and  some  of  which  do  not  appear  in 
any  version  :  they  must  therefore  have  been  lost  before  the  Alexan- 
drine was  made.  Comp.  Ps.  xxv.  5,  6,  17,  18;  xxxvii.  20,  28; 
cxlv.  13,  14.  Some  things  also  seem  to  have  been  added  or  intro- 
duced in  those  ancient  times  ;  as  the  genealogy  in  Ex.  vi.  14 — 27, 
which  appears  out  of  place  ;  the  remark  respecting  the  quantity  of 
the  Ephah  in  Ex.  xvi.  36,  and  others. 

§  106.     The  Hebrew  text  from  the  age  of  the  Alexandrine  version  to 
the  year  200  after  Christ. 

From  the  third  century  before  to  the  end  of  the  second  after 
Christ,  very  many  various  readings  are  observed  in  the  Alexandrine 
version  and  the  Peshito  Syriac,  in  the  fragments  of  Aquila,  Theodo- 
tion,  Symmachus,  and  the  fifth,  sixth,  and  seventh  versions,  in  the  para- 
phrase of  Onkelos,  in  quotations  in  the  TVew  Testament,  in  Flavius 
Josephus,  and  in  the  Mishna.  Many  of  these  discrepancies  are  to 
be  ascribed  to  the  errors,  unwarranted  hberties,  and  negligence  of  the 
interpreters  ;  but  not  a  few  of  them  are  found  in  our  own  Hebrew 
manuscripts,  which  shows  that  they  existed  in  the  old  copies  which 
the  interpreters  used.  See  Capel,  Crit.  Sac.  T.  I.  L.  I.  cap.  13, 
T.  II.  L.  IV.  cap.  2—14.    Kenn.  On  the  State  of  the  Hebrew  Text, 

Diss.  II.  pp.  326 — 333. It  may  be  of  use  to  remark,  that  the 

Alexandrine  translators  differ  from  our  Hebrew  text  more  frequently 


126     GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

than  those  of  the  second  century  after  Christ.  See  Capel,  ubi  sup, 
T.  II.  L.  V.  cap.  4, 5.  p.  805 — 845.  Several  causes  may  be  assigned 
for  this  fact.  In  the  third  century  before  Christ  the  text  was  defaced 
with  fewer  errors  than  in  the  second  century  after  Christ ;  the  Alex- 
andrine translators  frequently  erred  in  consequence  of  their  imper- 
fect acquaintance  with  Hebrew  grammar ;  and  lastly  they  used  a 
greater  freedom  in  translating  than  interpreters  of  the  second  cen- 
tury- who  were  anxious  to  exhibit  to  both  the  contending  parties, 
Jews  and  Christians,  what  the  Hebrew  text  contained. 

§  107.     The  Hebrew  Text  from  the  year  200  to  the  year  500. 

The  Hebrew  text,  as  it  existed  from  the  year  200  to  the  year  600, 
is  presented  to  us  by  Origen  in  his  Hexapla,  by  Jerome  in  his  Latin 
version  and  commentary,  by  Jonathan  in  his  paraphrase  of  the  Pro- 
phets, and  by  the  Rabbins  in  quotations  made  in  the  Gemara.  The 
varieties  are  scarcely  more  numerous  or  important  than  those  in  the 
versions  of  the  second  century.  The  discrepancies  in  the  Hebrew 
manuscripts  in  the  second  century,  or  at  least  in  the  third,  excited 
the  attention  of  Jews,  and  they  began  to  compare  copies,  and  to 
collect  various  readings,  which,  distributed  in  different  classes,  ap- 
pear in  the  Jerusalem  Talmud,  about  the  year  280.  See  Tract. 
Thaanith,  p.  68.     They  are  as  follows. 

I.  Ittur  Sopherim,  Dnsio  y\\2y,  the  rejection  of  the  Scribes,  in  five 

places  ;  where  the  reader  is  directed  to  reject  the  prefix  vau,  as  in 
Gen.  xviii.  5.  *inN  for  nnxi.     The  other  places  are  Num.  xii.  14. 

Ps.  xxiv.  65.  Ixviii,  26.* 

II.  Thikkun  Sopherim,  D'liJiD  pp'n,  correction  of  the  Scribes,  in 

16  or  18  places  ;  where,  of  two  readings  that  which  appeared  pre- 
ferable is  selected,  as  in  I  Sam.  iii.  1 3.  dhS  to  them,  for  'h  to  me. 

III.  Extraordinary  points  over  one,  more,  or  all  the  letters  of 
some  word,  in  16  places  ;  as  Num.  xxi.  30.  ityx,  for  which  the  Sa- 

*  [Jahn,  in  both  his  Latin  and  Gennan  works,  gives  only  these  four  references, 
although  he  mentions  ^rc ;  supply  from  De  Wette,  Einleit.  S.  152.,  Gen.  xxir. 
5S.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLI>    TESTAMENT.  127 

maritan  and  Alexandrine  versions  read  tjfx,  and  Ps.  xxvii.  13.  nSxS. 

These  points,  or  at  least  many  of  them,  seem  to  have  arisen  from  the 
unwilhngness  of  the  transcriber  to  erase  a  letter  or  word  improperly 
written,  which  he  rather  chose  to  denounce  by  this  point,  while  other 
subsequent  copyists  transcribed  the  points  along  with  the  word.  The 
point  over  the  vau  in  nDW3  in  Gen.  xix.  33.  the  Jews  explained,  Je- 
rome tell  us,  in  another  way. 

IV.  K'ri  v'lo  k'thib,  yns  xSi  ""ip,  to  be  read  although  not  vyritten; 

where  an  omitted  word,  found  in  other  documents,  is  supplied,  but 
not  introduced  into  the  text,  which  exhibits  only  the  punctuation,  the 
word  itself  being  written  in  the  margin.  Thus  in  II  Sam.  viii.  3,  the 
points  are  in  the  text,  -^  ■ ,  and  in  the  margin  the  word,  n"i3,  that  is, 
m3.     The  Talmud  gives  six  instances,  Ehas  Levita  eight  or  ten, 

Avenar  and  Capel  thirteen. 

V.  K'thib  v'lo  k'ri,  np  vh)  3'np,  written  and  not  to  be  read,  in  five 

places  ;  where  what  is  written  in  the  text  without  vowels  is  directed 
to  be  omitted,  because  not  found  in  other  manuscripts,  as  KJ  in 
II  Kings  V.  18. 

VI.  K'ri  k'thib,  3T>p  np,  read  what  is  written ;  that  is  for  what 

is  in  the  text  another  word  written  in  the  margin  is  to  be  read,  to 
which  the  vowel  points  connected  with  the  word  in  the  text  are  to 
be  applied.  The  number  of  these  varies  with  various  manuscripts 
from  793  to  1259.  See  Capel,  Crit.  Sac  T.  I.  L.  III.  cap.  i.  p. 
176 — 178.  All  of  them  relate  to  the  letters  themselves  or  conso- 
nants, and  several  exhibit  various  readings,  as  Eccles.  ix.  4.  "yVST  for 

*i3n%  and  vh  and  \h  are  often  conunuted.  Some  contain  explana- 
tions of  difficult  words,  as  in  I.  Sam.  v.  6,  9.  vi.  4,  5,  11,  17,  and  in 
Deut.  xxviii.  27,  D"'inB  for  D'Ssy.     Some  are  periphrases  of  words 

'  which  were  thought  to  be  obscene,  as  in  II  Kings  xviii.  27.  Isa. 
xxxvi.  12.  DTT'Sj*)  '0  water  of  their  feet,  for  DHT^  their  urine ;  and 


I2i\       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

some  relate  to  other  trifling  matters.  See  Capel,  ubi  sup.  Cap.  4 — 17. 
p.  188— 422.  Walton,  Prol.  VIII.  §  20—28.  Kennic.  Diss.  II.  on 
Hebrew  text,  pp.  281—287. 

VII.  Phiska,  NpDB,  or  Phragma,  nnjns,  an  empty  space  in  the 

middle  of  a  verse,  generally  designated  with  a  small  circle,  and  indi- 
cating that  something  is  wanting  ;  or,  as  others  suppose,  that  the 
sense  is  completed  here.  The  former  opinion  agrees  with  Gen. 
iv.  8  ;  the  latter  with  some  other  places.  These,  however,  do  not 
properly  belong  to  the  present  head,  as  they  were  not  known  before 
the  publication,  which  was  at  a  later  period  than  that  now  referred 
to.     In  all  they  amount  to  28. 

VIII.  The  Masora,  in  addition  to  the  preceding,  mentions  some 
critical  conjectures  of  the  learned,  which  are  called  S'birim,  D''*i"'3D  ; 

as  for  instance,  nonifD  for  0"'*i2fn,  in  Ex.  ii.  1 9. [a] 

[a)  For  the  references  to  the  instances  of  each  of  the  preceding  classes 
of  readings,  see  the  Germ.  Introd.  p.  385 — 388.     TrJ] 

§  108.     The  Masora. 

The  critical  observations  which  have  been  enumerated  in  the  prece- 
ding section,  together  with  others  which  occur  in  the  Talmud  relating 
to  the  small,  large,  inverted  and  suspended  letters,  form  the  basis  of 
the  Masora,  which  was  written  in  a  distinct  volume  and  enlarged  in 
course  of  time  by  continual  additions.  This  work  was  not  begun  be- 
fore the  sixth  century,  and  its  principal  authors  were  the  masters  of 
the  school  of  Tiberias.  These  teachers  continued  in  subsequent  ages 
to  collect  observations  relating  to  the  number  of  the  letters,  words,  and 
verses  of  each  book  ;  its  middle  letter,  word,  and  verse  ;  the  places 
where  the  same  word  is  written  with  or  without  its  mater  lecticmis ; 
the  verses  which  contain  all  the  letters  of  the  alphabet  or  a  certain 
number  ;  the  words  which  are  written  with  a  final  letter  in  the  middle, 
and  those  which  have  a  letter  in  its  medial  form  at  the  end  ;  the  num- 
ber of  final  letters  in  all  the  books,  &,c.  This  collection  which  was 
all  written  in  one  volume  and  was  constantly  increasing,  was  called 
miDD,  nniDD  or  mion,  Masora,  Massora  or  3^ssoreth,[a]  and  its 


OF     THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  ,  J  29 

authors  Masorets,  (or  Masorites,)  and  by  this  detail  of  trifling  obser- 
vations they  endeavoured  to  preserve  the  text  from  alterations.  See 
Walton.  Prol.  VIII.  §  1—12.  Capel.  ubi  sup.  cap.  12.  p.  901— 
918.     BrxT.  Tiber.  1656,  ^Basil. 

In  course  of  time  this  work,  which  had  been  put  together  with- 
out any  arrangement,  was  written  out,  at  first  with  many  abbreviations 
and  afterwards  in  full,  on  the  margin  of  manuscripts,  in  small  letters, 
and  what  the  margin  was  not  large  enough  to  contain  was  placed  at  the 
end  of  each  book.  The  abbreviated  transcript  was  called  the  httle 
Masora,  the  other  the  great  and  final.  Walton.  Prol.  VIT.  §  9,  11. 
The  confusion  of  this  farrago  proved  advantageous  to  criticism. 
For  if  it  had  been  arranged  in  some  order,  its  ardent  admirers  could 
easily  have  made  use  of  it ;  and  they  would  not  have  fiiiled  to  alter  the 
Hebrew  text  so  as  to  agree  with  the  Masora,  and  to  reject  all  other 
readings,  not  a  few  of  which  are  undoubtedly  genuine.  But  as  the 
transcribers  could  not  retain  in  mind  the  whole  Masora,  and,  from  its 
want  of  arrangement,  could  not  compare  it  with  the  text,  they  wrote 
with  fidelity  what  they  found  in  the  manuscripts,  and  introduced  into 

I  their  copies  no  more  of  the  Masora  than  what  their  memory  supplied. 

i  On  the  whole  the  Masora  has  been  of  more  injury  than  benefit  to  the 
integrity  of  the  text,  although  it  has  preserved  many  readings,  and 
among  them  some  certainly  genuine,  which  had  otherwise  perished. 
See  Walt.  Prol.  VIII.  §  14--17.  Simon,  Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  Liv. 
I.  Chap.  I.  p.  1.  ss.  Cliap.  24 — 26,  p.  131.  ss.  Kenn.  Diss.  II.  p- 
-262—291. 

[a)  The  word  means  tradition,  from  1373  to  deliver.   See  Buxt.  Lex. 

Chal.  Tal.  col.  1235.  and  Tiberias,  c.  i.  p.  3.  ss.     Tr.] 

§  109.     Eastern  and  Western  Headings. 
From  the  sixth  century  to  the  tenth,  during  which  period  the  Ma- 
sora was  framed,  there  existed  flourishing  Jewish  schools,  at  Babylon 
^  |)r  Seleucia  in  the  east,  and  at  Tiberias  in  the  west,  in  which  manv 
lopies  of  the  sacred  books  were  made.     In  these  different  countries 
herefore  two  families  of  manuscripts  arose,  which  at  length  in  the 
eighth  or  ninth  century  were  collated.     The  discrepancies  which  were 
'    (bserved.  are  called  nN''ipn  mS'SrTD.  varieties  of  the  reading,  and 

I 


130      GEX5*iAL  INTRODUCTIOi\  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

come  down  to  us  under  the  name  of  eastern  and  western  readings. 
According  to  some  their  number  amounted  to  210,  according  to 
others  to  216,  but  in  reality  they  were  220,  all  relating  to  the  conso- 
nants, except  the  point  Mappik  in  nt^j;,  Amos.  iii.  6.,  and  in  nxy, 

Jer.  vi.  6.  Our  editio!^s  vary  from  the  eastern  readings  in  fifty-five 
places.  Walt.  Prol.  VIII.  §  27,  28.  Capet,,  ubi  sup.  T.  I.  L.  HI. 
c.  xvii.  The  eastern  text  of  this  age  appears  to  be  contained  in 
the  version  of  Saadias  Gaon,  and  in  some  measure  in  the  more  mo- 
dern of  the  Targums,  in  which,  although  in  other  respects  they  are 
not  of  great  value,  many  good  readings  have  been  preserved,  which 
are  of  the  greater  moment,  if  they  coincide  with  other  more  ancient 
versions  in  opposition  to  the  Masora  and  our  Masoretical  text. 

§  110.     Recension  of  Aaron  Ben  Asher  and  Jacob  Ben  Naphtali. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  eleventh  century,  Aaron  Ben  Asher,  at 
Tiberias,  and  Jacob  Ben  Naphtah,  at  Babylon  or  Seleucia,  collated 
manuscripts.  The  various  readings  which  were  the  result  of  this 
comparison,  which  amounted  to  864,  relgite  to  the  vowel  points  and 
accents,  with  the  exception  of  one  place.  Cant.  viii.  6,  where,  accord* 
ing  to  Ben  Naphtali,  we  ought  to  read  n"'  nan'7B',  in  two  words,  but 

according  to  Ben  Asher,  riTinnSii',  in  one.     These  varieties  are  not 

indeed  of  great  consequence,  but  they  show  that  at  this  time  the  punc- 
tuation system  was  already  completed  ;  although  it  may  be  said  in  a 
certain  sense,  that  these  two  men  gave  the  finishing  stroke  to  that 
work.  On  account  of  the  greater  facility  with  which  manuscripts 
pointed  according  to  that  system  might  be  read,  the  more  ancient 
copies  which  were  either  entirely  unpointed,  or  varied  from  the  sys- 
tem, became  disesteemed  and  were  suffered  to  perish.  This  seems  to 
be  the  principal  cause  why  no  Hebrew  manuscript  is  extant,  which 
can  be  proved  by  satisfactory  evidence  to  be  older  than  the  eleventh 
century. — Our  editions,  except  in  a  few  places,  follow  the  recension  of 
Aaron  Ben  Asher. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  131 

§111.  History  of  the  text  from  the  year  1040  to  1477. 
The  learned  Jews  who  removed  from  the  East  to  Europe  in  the 
middle  of  the  eleventh  century,  brought  with  them  pointed  manu- 
scripts, and  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  copies  were  writ- 
ten out  and  corrected  with  greater  care  than  was  exercised  in  the 
following  ages.  There  are,  however,  circumstances  tending  to  lessen 
the  value  of  such  copies.  1)  The  Hebrew  Grammar  composed  by 
Saadias  Gaon,  who  died  in  942,  and  afterwards  improved  by  Judah 
Chiug  about  1070,  and  translated  from  the  Arabic  into  Rabbinic  by 
Rabbi  Samuel,  might  have  induced  transcribers  who  were  acquainted 
with  it  to  correct  the  anomalies  which  existed  in  the  text ;  yet  from 
the  number  remaining  at  present,  it  appears  that  they  very  seldom 
ventured  to  do  this.  But  as  there  is  no  room  for  suspecting  that  a 
reading  accordant  with  grammatical  principles  should  have  been 
changed  into  one  that  is  anomalous,  the  rule  holds  good,  '  that  an 
anomalous  reading,  caeteris  paribus,  is  more  probable  than  one  which 
is  grammatical.'  This  rule  is  certainly  correct ;  yet  it  is  by  no 
means  to  be  urged  beyond  its  legitimate  extent,  for  an  anomalous 
reading  may  have  arisen  from  an  error  of  the  pen,  or  from  an  impru- 
dent introduction  of  a  marginal  note  into  the  text. 2)  The  Jew- 
ish Rabbins  of  those  times,  especially  Maimonides,  Jarchi,  Abenez 
ra  and  Kimchi,  frequently  cite  places  then  differently  read,  and  some- 
times mention  various  readings ;  which  proves  that  differences 
existed  among  the  manuscripts.  They  also  appeal  to  manuscripts, 
by  which  others  recently  written  were  corrected.  These  standard 
manuscripts  differed  in  different  countries,  but  all  exhibited  some 
spurious  readings,  which  were  propagated  by  the  correctors  to  all 
others  of  the  same  country.  For  this  reason  all  manuscripts  of  the 
same  country  constitute  one  and  the  same  family,  and  like  witnesses 
giving  evidence  in  concert,  are  to  be  considered  in  criticism  as  affording 
no  more  than  single  testimony.  Moreover  since  many  more  manu- 
scripts of  some  countries  have  been  preserved  than  of  others,  the 
general  rule  that  the  reading  which  has  the  support  of  the  greater 
number  of  manuscripts  is  always  the  more  probable,  does  not  hold 

|;  good. 3)  Although  during  this  period  not  a  few  of  the  Jews  held 

the  Masora  in  but  little  estimation,  yet  by  many  others  it  was  re- 
garded as  an  infalhble  rule  :  nor  can  it  be  doubted  that  the  standai'd 


132       GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

manuscripts  by  whieh  others  were  usually  corrected,  had  been  made 
as  conformable  as  possible  to  the  Masora,  and  that  the  greater  part 
of  transcribers  obeyed  its  precepts  as  far  as  their  knowledge  of  them 
extended.  The  Masora,  therefore,  with  the  manuscripts  which  agree 
with  it  constitute  only  one  testimony,  and  an  antimasoretical  reading 

is  more  probable  than  one  which  is  masoretical.\(i\ 4)  Readings 

not  favourable  to  Christians  were  extended  even  in  times  anterior 
to  these,  and  as  they  existed  now  in  the  standard  copies,  they 
passed  into  almost  all  the:  manuscripts,  as  Hl^w  in  Gen.  xlix.  10.,  a 
reading,  which  before  the  8th  century  at  least,  was  altogether  un- 
known.  5)     It   is  not  probable  that  during  this  period  the  Jews 

corrected  the  text  in  some  places  from  the  Chaldee  Paraphrases 
which  they  were  accustomed  to  use  ;  for  they  greatly  preferred  the 
original  text.  On  the  contrary,  they  rather  seem  to  have  modified 
the  Paraphrases  occasionally  so  as  to  suit  the  Hebrew ;  and 
therefore  the  testimony  of  the  former  to  the  reading  of  any  pas- 
sage ought  to  be  taken,  whenever  it  is  practicable,  from  the  most 
ancient  manuscripts. 

[a)  'Of  course  the  author's  meauiiig  is,  if  m  other  respects  the  charae- 
, ,     ter  be  equally  good.     Even  m  this  sense,  the  rule  is  not  be  applied  with- 
out much  caution,  as  the  Masora  may  afford  a  reading  more  ancient,  and 
therefore  more  likely  to  be  genuine,  than  any  other  now  extant.     See 
Ttchseni  Tentamen.  pp.  213.  ss.  256.  ss.     TV.] 

§  112.     The  principal  editions  of  tlie  Hebrew  Text. 

Such  were  the  manuscripts  from  which  the  first  editions  were 
printed.  The  editors  do  indeed  speak  in  high  terms  of  the  antiquity 
and  excellence  of  the  manuscripts  which  they  used,  but  they  scarcely 
understood  what  good  and  ancient  manuscripts  were,  and  neglected 
not  only  the  ancient  versions,  but  also  all  other  manuscripts  besides 
that  from  which  they  printed.  It  was  impossible  therefore  that  they 
could  avoid  introducing  into  their  edition  all  the  errors  of  that  copy, 
and  hence  the  first  editions  are  by  no  means  the  best,  although  they  are 
of  great  value,  because  they  supply  the  places  of  the  manuscripts  from 
which  they  were  taken.  The  editions  which  immediately  succeeded 
the  first  are  very  seldom  corrected  by  manuscript  copies,  but  are' 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  133 

often  accommodated  to  the  principles  of  grammar  and  to  the  Masora, 
It  is  therefore  by  no  means  surprising  that  Bruns  found  the  first 
editions  more  closely  correspondent  with  manuscripts  than  the  sub- 
sequent.    See  Kenn.  Diss.  Gen.  Ed.  Bruns.  p.  123. 

The  first  editions  are  the  following.  1)  In  1477,  the  Psalter  with 
the  commentary  of  Kimchi,  in  large  quarto.  It  seems  to  have  been 
printed  at  Bologna.  It  abounds  with  errors,  and  the  matres  lectionis 
are  introduced  or  omitted  at  pleasure. 2)  In  1482,  the  Penta- 
teuch in  folio,  was  printed  at  Bologna,  together  with  the  Paraphrase 

of  Onkelos.[a]     The  typography  is  accurate. 3)   1486-6.     The 

former  and  later  prophets  accurately  printed  at  Soncino  in  two  vo- 
lumes folio. [6] 4)   1487.     The  Psalter  with  the  commentary  of 

Kimchi,  and  the  remainder  of  the  Hagiographa  with  commenta- 
ries, printed  in  small  folio  at  Naples. [c]     The  typography  is  quite 

inaccurate. 5)   1488.  The  Hebrew  Bible,  printed  at  Soncino  in 

small  folio.  The  Pentateuch  follows  the  Bologna  edition  of  1482, 
and  coincides  with  that  in  Vander  Hooght.  The  former  and  later 
prophets  agree  with  those  of  the  Soncino  edition  of  1485-6,  and  the 
Hagiographa  with  that  of  Naples  1487. [dj  The  Soncino  edition, 
was  followed  in  that  printed  at  Brescia  in  1494,  from  which,  or  from 
the  preceding  of  Soncino,  most  of  the  subsequent  editions  have  been 
printed. 

In  1502 — 1517,  the  Complutensian  Polyglot  was  printed  at  Alcala 
or  Complutum  in  Spain,  in  6  volumes  folio.  It  contains  the  Hebrew 
text,  printed  after  manuscripts,  with  the  vowel  points,  but  without 
accents,  besides  the  Alexandrine  version,  the  Latin  Vulgate,  and  the 
Targum  of  Onkelos. 

The  two  Bomberg  editions,  with  the  Targums  and  Rabbinical  com- 
mentaries, were  printed  by  Cornelius  and  Daniel  Bomberg,  at  Ve- 
nice ;  the  first  in  1618  under  the  care  of  Felix  Pratensis  a  converted 
Jew,  and  the  second  in  1525-6  under  the  care  of  Jacob  Ben  Chaijim. 
The  latter,  which  has  been  followed  in  many  subsequent  editions,  was 
more  accurately  reprinted  in  1547-9. 

In  1569-72,  the  Antwerp  Polyglot  was  printed  in  8  volumes  folio, 
the  expense  being  defrayed  by  Philip  II.  of  Spain,  whence  it  has 
been  called  the  royal  Polyglot.  It  contains  the  Hebrew  text,  accord- 
ing to  the  Complutensian  edition,  with  a  few  changes  ;  the  Targum 


%-■ 


J  34  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOK5 


of  Onkelos,  that  of  Jonathan  on  the  prophets,  the  Targum  of  Job 
and  the  five  Megilloth,  from  the  second  Romberg  edition ;  also  the 
Alexandrine  version  and  the  Latin  Vulgate.  It  was  printed  under 
the  superintendence  of  Arias  Montanus. 

The  Paris  Polyglot  was  printed  in  1629-45,  in  9  folio  volumes,  at 
the  expense  of  Le  Jay.  In  addition  to  what  is  found  in  the  Antwerp 
Bible,  it  contains  also  the  Syriac  Peshito  version,  according  to  an  im- 
perfect manuscript,  the  lacunae  of  which  Gabriel  Sionita  supplied  by 
a  translation  of  his  own  made  from  the  Vulgate ;  the  Arabic  version  ; 
and  the  Samaritan  text  and  version. 

In  1667  appeared  the  London  Polyglot  edited  by  Walton,  in  six 
volumes  folio,  which  adds  to  what  is  contained  in  that  of  Paris,  the 
Ethiopic  version  of  the  Psalter  and  Canticles,  and  the  Persian  ver- 
sion of  the  Pentateuch.  This  Polyglot  was  accompanied  by  the 
Lexicon  Heptaglotton  of  Castell,  in  two  volumes,  folio. 

There  are,  therefore,  three  fundamental  editions  of  the  Hebrew 
text.  1)  That  of  Soncino  of  1488,  reprinted  in  the  Brescian  edition 
of  1494;  2)  the  Complutensian,  finished  in  1517;  and  3)  the 
second  Bomherg  of  1526. — From  these  all  other  editions  have 
emanated  either  directly  or  indirectly.  In  a  very  few  some  things 
have  been  corrected  from  manuscript  copies. — The  most  celebrated 
of  these  is  the  edition  of  Joseph  Athias,  printed  at  Amsterdam  in 
1661.  The  edition  of  Vander  Hooght  of  1 705  accompanied  by  some 
various  readings,  has  acquired  celebrity  from  the  circumstance  of 
Kennicott's  collation  of  manuscripts  having  been  made  by  it. — There 
are  other  more  modern  editions  of  less  celebrity.  Jablonsky's  very 
correct  edition  is  followed  in  the  celebrated  one  of  John  Henry  Mi- 
chaelis  of  1720. — But  although  all  the  editions  have  flowed  from  the 
above  mentioned  three,  and  a  few  contain  some  corrections  taken 
from  manuscripts  ;  yet  they  differ  in  many  respects,  and  even  exhibit 
some  readings  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  any  manuscript  or  ancient 
version,  and  are  mere  errors  of  the  press,  [e] 

[a)  The  commentary  of  Jarchi  13  also  subjoined.     Tr.'] 
\b)  Togelher  with  the  commentary  of  David  Kimchi.     Tr.\ 
[c)  De  Rossi  describes  them  as  forming  two  distinct   volumes   in 
■email  quarto.     The  commentaries  on  the  Hagiographa,  are  those  of  Im- 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  13^ 

mauuel  on  the  Proverbs  ;  of  Ben  Gershom  on  Job,  and  of  Jarchi  on  the 
remaining  books.     TV.]  .m,^^: 

[d)  This  was  the  first  edition  of  tlie  entire  Hebrew  Scriptures.  An 
accurate  account  of  this  and  the  preceding  editions  may  be  found  in  De 
Rossi,  De  Hebraicae  Typographiae  origine  ac  primitiis,  ed.  G.  F.  HuEF- 
NAGEL  Erlanga  1778.  pp.  12 — 44  In  a  note  on  p.  14.  Hiifnagel  asserts, 
after  Kennicott,  that  the  Bible  of  Soncini  differs  from  the  text  of  Vander 
Hooght  in  eleven  thousand  places.  Home  says  twelve  thousand,  and  that 
Masch  questions  the  truth  of  the  assertion.  Horne  Introd.  II.  p.  114. 
Tr.] 

[e)  Dr.  Jahn  is  himself  the  editor  of  a  very  useful  edition  of  the  He- 
brew Bible,  in  four  8vo.  volumes  printed  at  Vienna.  In  this  work  he 
has  arranged  those  books  which  contain  the  same  portion  of  history  in  se- 
parate columns  as  a  harmony ;  viz.  the  books  of  Chronicles,  with  those 
of  Samuel  and  Kings,  and  a  few  portions  of  Genesis.  The  prophets  he 
has  digested  in  chronological  order.  In  addition  to  the  usual  divisions 
into  chapters  and  verses  which  are  marked  in  the  margin,  he  has  distri- 
buted the  various  books  into  sections  according  to  the  subjects,  prefixing 
to  each  a  short  statement  of  the  contents.  He  has  also  added  the  more 
important  various  readings ;  and  at  the  end  of  the  4th  volume  a  cata- 
logue of  manuscripts  and  editions.  The  last  edition  was  printed  in  1806. 
— On  the  subject  of  the  preceding  section  much  valuable  additional  infor- 
mation may  be  derived  from  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  95,  96,  and  the  au- 
thorities there  referred  to ;  and  from  Horne's  Introd.  Vol.  II.  Part  T. 
Ch.  iii.  }  1.  pp.  113—126.     TV.] 

§  113.  Origin  rf  the  Samaritan  text. [a] 
The  Pentateuch  which  the  Samaritans  have  preserved  in  their  own  /JP 
character,  has  no  doubt  descended  from  the  time,  when  (975  B.  C.) 
the  ten  tribes  separated  from  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  For  after  this 
period  a  perpetual  jealousy  raged  between  the  two  kingdoms,  and 
therefore  the  ten  tribes  or  at  least  the  priests  of  the  golden  calves 
did  not  receive  copies  from  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  but  transcribed 
from  their  own  manuscripts,  and  thus  handed  them  down  to  posterity. 
Upon  the  deportation  of  the  ten  tribes  740  and  722  B.  C,  the  fo- 
reigners, who  had  been  sent  into  the  country,  became  mingled  with 
those  of  the  Israelites  who  had  remained,  and  were  called  Samari- 
tans. Being  infested  by  lions,  they  received  an  Israeli tish  priest  sent 
by  the  Assyrian  monarch  to  instruct  them  in  the  Mosaic  religion. 
He  fixed  his  residence  in  Bethel,  where  the  golden  calf  was  first 
worshipped,  and  was  therefore  a  priest  of  the  calf.     He  took  with 


ED  ROOKS       ^T 


]36   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  ROOKS 

him  his  Israelitish  manuscript';  for  the  ancient  hatred  awainsl  the 
kingdom  of  Judah  still  subsisting  mai^  have  made  him  reject  with  ab- 
horrence the  idea  of  borrowing  tfience.  Copies  of  this  manuscript 
were  spread  among  the  Samaritans,  and  some  have  been  preserved 
to  our  own  time,  without  having  been  modified  according  to  the 
Jewish  text.  The  animosity  prevailing  between  the  Samaritans  and 
the  Jews  effectually  precluded  this,  and  the  Jewish  apostates,  who 
went  over  to  the  Samaritans,  would  not  dare  to  remove  the  discre- 
pancies  from  Jewish  manuscripts  which  still  exist. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  following  section,  see  HoR^E,  In- 
trod.  Vol.  II.  Part.  I.  c.  1.  Sect.  2.  pp.  10—15.  Carpzov,  P.  II.  c.  iv. 
p.  585 — 620.  EiCHHORN,  {  378—389.  Bauer,  {  92—94.  Simon,  L. 
I.  c.  X — xiii.  Prideaux,  Part.  I.  Book  vi.  anno  409,  p.  413 — 425.  Ge- 
3ENIUS  de  Pentateuchi  Samaritani  origine,  indole  et  auctoritate  Com- 
mentatio  philologico-critica,  Halm-  1815.  Comp.  also  an  article  in  the 
North  American  Review  for  April  1826,  p.  274—317.     TV.] 

§  114.     History  of  the  Samaritan  text . 

The  Samaritan  text  has  not  been  altered  to  suit  the  Masora,  and 
in  consequence  of  the  small  nuniber  of  Samaritans,  it  has  not  been 
very  often  transcribed.  This  accounts  for  the  comparative  fewness 
of  its  errors.  It  has  many  faults  however  of  another  kind  from 
which  the  Jewish  text  is  free.  1)  The  gutturals,  (^s  n,  n,  N,)  which 
the  Samaritans  do  not  pronounce,  are  very  often  commuted,  and 
therefore  discrepancies  arising  from  this  cause  can  by  no  means  be 
reckoned  in  the  class  of  various  readings,  but  are  to  be  considered  as 

mere  errors. 2)  The  matres  lectionis  are  frequently  introduced 

and  in  observance  of  certain  rules,  while  the  Jewish  text  retains  more 

constantly  the   old  freedom  of  orthography. 3)  Many  readings 

occur  which  owe  their  origin  to  some  preconceived  opinions,  as  the 
ages  of  the  patriarchs  in  Gen.  v.  and  xi.  which  in  regular  and  equa- 
ble proportion  diminish  with  progressive  generations.  Jerome 
(Quaest.  in  Gen.  v.  26-28.)  found  the  Samaritan  text  in  his  time  not 

arranged  in  this  manner. 4)  Some  changes  appear  to  have  been 

made  from  conjecture,  or  to  solve  difficulties,  as  in  Gen.  iii.  2.  ji'n^n, 

the  liar,  for  »n3n,  the  serryri ;  Gen.  xxxi.  63.  1331V\  Jet  him  judge. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  li^7 

for  ^£33^/',  let  them  judge. 5)  Several  other  passages,  which  are 

wanting  in  the  Jewish  text  seem  to  be  interpolated,  as  Ex.  xii.  40,, 
and  in  the  places  where  Kennicott  supposed  the  Hebrew  to  be  de- 
fective ;  viz.  Ex.  vi.  9.  vii.  18.  viii.  4,  6,  23.  ix.  6,  19.  x.  6.  xi.  4. 
xviii.  4.  XX.  17,  19,  22, 

[a)  The  importance  of  the  subject  of  these  two  sections,  induces  the 
translators  to  subjoiu  a  further  account  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  re- 
ferring for  more  information  to  the  authors  above  mentioned. 

The  Samaritans  derive  their  name  from  the  capital  city  of  the  king- 
dom of  Israel,  which  was  built  by  Omri,  and  called  after  the  name  of  the 
owner  of  the  ground,  Samaria,  I  Kings  xvi.  24.  It  was  taken  by  the 
Assyrians  in  the  9th  year  of  Hoshea,  and  the  inhabitants  were  removed 
to  the  country  of  the  conquerors,  and  to  different  parts  of  Media,  and 
colonists  from  Babylon  and  Cutha,  and  several  other  cities,  were  substi- 
tuted by  the  king  of  Assyria.  They  introduced  their  own  idolatrous 
worship,  and,  upon  being  distressed  by  lions,  made  inquiry  into  the  na- 
ture of  the  worship  which  had  formerly  prevailed  in  Samaria,  and  incor- 
porated the  Mosaic  rites,  in  which  they  were  instructed  by  a  captive 
priest  sent  by  the  king  of  Assyria,  with  their  idolatrous  usages  and  cere- 
monies; II  Kings  xvii.  6,  24 — 41.  Thus  their  religious  service  became 
of  a  mixed  character,  partly  according  to  the  rites  of  the  Mosaic  law, 
and  partly  Heathenish.  Upon  the  return  of  the  Jews  from  the  Baby- 
Ionian  captivity,  the  Samaritans  were  desirous  of  uniting  with  them  in 
rebuilding  the  temple  at  Jerusalem.  The  Jews  declined  the  proffered 
co-operation,  and  this,  together  with  the  favours  which  they  received 
from  the  Persian  monarcbs,  inflamed  against  them  the  jealousy  and 
odium  of  the  Samaritans ;  Ez.  iv.  1 — 16.  Neh.  iv.  1 — 8.  This  hostility 
was  afterwards  greatly  increased,  when,  in  the  reign  of  Darius  Codoman- 
nus,  as  Josephus  says,  (Ant.  XI.  vii.  ^  2.  viii,  g  2, 4,  6,)  but  more  proba- 
bly, according  to  Prideadx,  (P.  I.  B.  vi.  Anno  409,  p.  413.)  and  Jahn, 
(Bibl.  Archaeologie,  Th,  II.  B.  I.  S.  278,)  and  Eichhorn,  (§  383. 
p.  613,  f.)  in  that  of  Darius  Nothus,  Manasses,  son*  (Neh,  xiii,  28.) 
of  the  Jewish  high  priest,  married  the  daughter  of  Sanballat,  the  Sama- 
ritan governor,  and  to  avoid  the  necessity  of  repudiating  her,  agreeably 
to  the  requisition  of  the  Mosaic  law,  left  Jerusalem  and  established  him- 
self as  high  priest  among  the  Samaritans,  in  a  temple  which  his  father- 
in-law  built  for  him  on  Mount  Gerizim.  This  raised  the  hatred  of  the 
two  nations  against  each  other  to  the  highest  pitch,  and  nothing  was 
more  abominable  in  the  estimation  of  either  than  the  name,  and  charac- 

■^  Josephus  Calls  him  brother  of  the  high  priest. 
IB 


138   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

ter,  and  religious  usages  of  the  other.  Subsequent  events  deprived  the 
Samaritans  of  their  city,  (Prideattx,  P.  I.  B.  viii.  Anno  331,  p.  499, 
500,)  and  increased  this  odium,  and  in  the  time  of  Christ  it  prevailed  so 
far,  that  no  term  of  reproach  in  use  among  the  Jews  was  more  contemptu- 
ous than  that  of  a  Samaritan.     See  John  viii.  48. 

After  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  had  lain  concealed  for  upwards  of  a 
thousand  years,  it  began  to  be  doubted  whether  such  a  work  had  ever 
existed.  It  had  been  mentioned  by  the  fathers,  Origen,  Eusebius,  Cyril 
of  Alexandria,  and  Jerome,  but  learned  men  began  to  he  disposed  to  give 
a  forced  explanation  of  their  words.  See  Bauer,  loc.  cit.  At  last  in 
the  year  1616,  Peter  a  Valle  procured  a  complete  copy,  which  Achilles 
Harlay  de  Sancy  sent  to  the  library  of  the  priests  of  the  Oratory  at 
Paris,  in  1623.  It  was  first  described  by  John  Morin  in  the  preface  to 
his  new  edition  of  the  Roman  text  of  the  Septuagint,  printed  at  Pa- 
ris, 1628,  and  more  particularly  in  his  Exercitationes  Ecclesiasticae  in 
utrumque  Samaritanorum  Pentateuchum,  Paris,  1631,  and  afterwards 
printed  in  the  Paris  Polyglot.  Usher  received  six  copies  from  the  East, 
and  several  others  were  obtained  by  some  of  the  learned.  Walton  intro- 
duced the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  into  his  Polyglot,  with  emendations  of 
it  as  published  in  the  Paris  edition. 

At  what  time  and  from  what  source  the  Samaritans  received  their 
Pentateuch  is  a  very  important  inquiry,  on  which  critics  have  enter- 
tained various  opinions.  Even  at  the  present  time  it  can  hardly  be  con- 
sidered as  settled.  It  was  the  opinion  of  Usher  that  Dositheus,  the 
founder  of  a  sect  in  the  first  century,  who  pretended  to  be  the  Messiah, 
made  up  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  from  the  Hebrew  edition  of  the  Pa- 
lestine and  Babylonian  Jews,  and  from  the  Greek  in  use  among  the  Hel- 
lenists, adding,  and  expunging,  and  altering  according  to  his  pleasure.— 
But  Origen  and  Photius,  to  whom  he  appeals,  afford  no  support  to  his  alle- 
gations, and  it  is  incredible  that  Dositheus  could  have  compiled  the  work 
in  question  without  having  been  opposed  by  the  Alexandrine  Samaritans. 

Le  Clerc  considered  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  as  the  work  of  the 
Israelitish  priest  who  was  sent  to  instruct  the  new  inhabitants  in  the  re- 
ligion of  the  country,  as  we  read  in  II  Kings  xvii.  27,  28.  This  is  mere 
hypothesis,  destitute  of  any  historical  evidence.  Nor  is  there  any  pro- 
bability that  it  will  ever  be  adopted  by  learned  men,  because  the  priest 
could  only  have  found  it  necessary  to  instruct  the  people  from  the  law 
which  he  took  with  him,  and  not  to  have  formed  a  whole  new  system. 
Thus  Bauer ;  in  addition  to  which  it  is  well  remarked  by  Carpzov, 
(Crit.  Sac.  p.  602,)  that  this  hypothesis  is  contradicted  by  Christ  and  his 
apostles,  who  repeatedly  ascribe  the  Pentateuch  to  Moses ;  and  also  by 
the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  themselves,  which  frequently 
refer  to  it  as  his  work. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  139 

Some  derive  this  Pentateuch  from  copies  existing  among  the  Israelites 
before  the  Assyrian  captivity,  or  even  before  the  separation  of  the  king- 
doms under  Jeroboam.  This  opinion,  which  was  advanced  by  Morin, 
has  been  adopted  by  Houbigant,  Kennicott,  John  David  Michaelis,  Eich- 
horn,  Bertholdt  and  others.  Bauer  also  accedes  to  it.  He  remarks, 
that  the  Israelites  when  they  revolted  with  Jeroboam  had  copies  of  the 
law  as  well  as  the  Jews,  which  is  evident  from  the  exhortations  in  the 
prophets,  and  from  the  fact  that  they  are  never  accused  of  wanting 
them  ;  that  when  the  body  of  the  people  were  removed  by  the  Assyrian 
monarch,  the  remainder  with  whom  the  new  settlers  mingled,  were  in 
all  probability  not  destitute  of  some  copies  of  the  Pentateuch ;  that  if 
this  should  be  asserted,  although  it  is  altogether  unlikely,  the  priest  be- 
fore mentioned  would  doubtless  take  a  copy  with  him,  as  he  went  to  in- 
struct the  people  in  the  law.  Hence  he  concludes,  that  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  as  well  as  the  Jewish  is  thus  to  be  traced  to  the  autograph 
of  Moses. 

Gesenius,  in  his  Commentatio  Philologico-critica  above  referred  to, 
examines  this  subject.  After  mentioning  the  opinion  originally  proposed 
by  Morin,  he  proceeds  to  state  the  principal  arguments  urged  in  its  de- 
fence, which  he  reduces  to  the  four  following,  1)  After  the  establish- 
ment of  the  idolatry  of  the  calves,  so  deadly  a  hatred  arose  between  the 
two  kingdoms,  as  to  make  it  altogether  improbable  that  after  that  event 
copies  of  the  law  should  pass^from  one  to  the  other. 2)  The  hypo- 
thesis accounts  for  the  fact,  that  the  Samaritans  receive  no  other  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  but  the  Pentateuch,  as  they  would  have  done,  had 

they  obtained  this  from  the  Jews  at  a  late  period. 3)  It  is  said  to  be 

inexplicable,  that  after  the  captivity  the  Samaritans  should  wish  to  co- 
operate with  the  Jews  in  rebuilding  the  temple,  unless  they  had  possess- 
ed the  Pentateuch. 4)  Tne  uiKerence  ol  the  writing,  it  is  ai-guetl,can 

best  be  explained  on  this  hypothesis,  the  Samaritans  having  preserved 
the  law  in  the  ancient  character. 

To  these  arguments,  which  undoubtedly  afford  a  very  imperfect  view 
of  the  evidence  in  favour  of  the  Israelitish  origin  of  the  Samaritan  Pen- 
tateuch, the  learned  author  replies  as  follows.  1)  It  has  been  proved 
by  Vater  and  De  Wette,  that  the  dissension  was  by  no  means  sufficient 
to  destroy  all  intercourse  between  the  kingdoms,  and  that  it  did  not  be- 
come a  settled  hatred  until  the  building  of  the  temple  on  Mount  Gerizim. 
And  that  the  prophets  should  not  have  communicated  the  law  to  the 
kingdom  of  Samaria,  where  they  very  often  gave  instructions,  is  utterly 

incredible. 2)    If  the  Samaritans  obtained  their  Pentateuch  from 

the  Jews  at  a  late  period,  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  they  would  have 
received  the  other  books,  as  it  is  not  uncommon  in  the  history  of  religions 
for  sects  to  admit  some  sacred  documents  and  to  reject  others ;  as  has 


140      GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

been  the  case  in  the  Christian  church  in  relation  to  St.  Paul's  epistles, 
and  to  the  Old  Testament.  And  so  great  was  the  virulence  of  the  Sa- 
maritans, that  they  despised  the  worship  offered  at  Jerusalem,  and  tra- 
duced David  and  Solomon  and  the  prophets  of  a  more  recent  age  than 
Moses  and  Joshua.     So  that  it  was  not  to  be  expected,  that  such  a  sect 

would  have  received  the  later  Hebrew  writings. 3)  From  the  fact 

stated  in  the  third  argument,  it  would  rather  seem,  according  to  the  au- 
thor, that  the  Samaritans  were  destitute  of  some  definite  and  authorized 

worship,  and  of  priests  of  any  distinction.     Comp.  II  Kings  xvii. 4)  The 

last  proof  be  considers  of  little  or  no  weight.  The  supposition  that  a 
change  of  the  letters  was  introduced  by  Ezra,  if  it  be  admitted,  does  not 
assume  that  the  present  Samaritan  character  was  in  use  before  the  cap- 
tivity, but  some  other  allied  to  the  Phoenician,  the  same  perhaps  as  is 
now  to  be  seen  on  Jewish  coins. 

Gesenius  allows  that  the  Pentateuch  might  have  passed  from  the  Jews 
to  the  Samaritans  before  the  captivity,  provided  it  existed  in  the  form 
in  which  we  now  have  it  among  the  Jews  themselves.  But  this  he  un- 
dertakes to  deny,  and  thinks  he  can  discover  in  Gen.  xlix.  Ex.  xv.  13,  17. 
Levit.  xxvi.  Num.  xxiv.  22.  and  particularly  in  Dent,  xxxii.  xxxiii. 
sufficient  evidence  that  even  the  Jewish  Pentateuch  as  now  subsisting 
cannot  be  allowed  a  higher  date  than  that  of  the  Babylonian  captivity. 
As  the  weight  of  his  arguments  depends  chiefly  on  those  loose  views  of 
prophecy  which  he  is  known  to  entertain,  they  will  not  occasion  much 
difficulty  to  the  man  who  believes  that  Moses  and  others  were  divinely 
inspired  to  predict  future  events  and  circumstances.  He  thinks  that  the 
books  of  Moses  were  reduced  to  their  present  form  a  short  time  after  the 
end  of  the  captivity,  and  passed  over  to  the  Samaritans  when  they  built 
the  temple  on  mount  Gerizim  ;  and  therefore  that  the  origin  of  the  Sa- 
maritan PpntaicLicii  IS  lo  dk  piauca  In  iiic  period  between  the  end  of  the 
captivity  and  the  erection  of  this  temple.  This  r.^ncilnsinn  coincides  with 
the  opinion  of  Prideaux,  although  it  is  maintained  on  different  grounds. 
But,  as  it  has  been  well  remarked  in  reference  to  this  hypothesis  of  Gese- 
nius, "  if  the  Pentateuch  was  first  reduced  to  writing  about  the  time  of 
the  Babylonian  exile,  then  there  remains  not  sufficient  time  for  the  nu- 
merous changes  to  have  taken  place,  by  which  the  various  recensions  in 
question  should  come  to  differ  so  much  from  each  other." 

They  who  are  opposed  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  says  Gesenius,  argue 
from  the  silence  of  Josephus.  But  this  is  hardly  worthy  of  notice,  as  a 
writer  might  readily  omit  such  a  circumstance,  knowing  that  his  reader 
would  suppose  of  course,  tliat  priests  would  have  the  law  of  Moses  and 
make  use  of  it  in  instituting  religious  rites. — They  argue  also  from  Ex. 
xxxiv.  16.  Deut.  vii.  3.,  where  foreign  marriages  are  prohibited.  But 
It  may  easily  be  supposed,  that  if  any  one  should  have  ventured  to  at- 


TO    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  141 

tack  the  high  priest  on  that  point  some  plausible  excuse  would  not  be 
wanting ;  and  as  the  priests  were  the  depositories  of  the  law,  there  was 
no  cause  of  apprehension  from  the  laity. 

Eichhorn,  in  the  edition  of  his  Einleitung  above  referred  to,  (4tb.  1823,) 
examines  the  hypothesis  of  Gesenius,  and  maintains  the  opinion  which 
he  had  advanced  in  his  former  edition,  remarking,  that  before  a  new  so- 
lution of  the  phenomenon  that  the  Samaritans  have  only  the  Pentateuch 
and  a  false  book  of  Joshua,  can  be  found,  it  is  necessary  to  refute  that 
which  deduces  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  from  the  kingdom  of  the  ten 
tribes,  which  has  never  yet  been  done,  and  to  show  that  the  Samaritans 
did  not  possess  the  Pentateuch  until  a  late  period,  in  support  of  which 
nothing  has  been  alleged  which  is  sanctioned  by  historical  facts. 

This  Pentateuch  therefore  may  be  considered  as  having  descended 
from  some  Israelitish  copy,  and  this  with  the  Jewish  or  Hebrew  text  con- 
stitute two  recensions  or  editions  of  the  work  of  Moses. 

Of  these  two  recensions  Morin  and  his  followers  give  a  decided  prefe- 
rence to  the  Samaritan,  while  Buxtorf  and  his  adherents  maintain  the 
exclusive  authority  of  the  Jewish.  Time  and  patient  investigation  have 
cooled  the  ardour  of  both  parties,  and  the  opinion  at  present  most  gene- 
rally adopted  is,  that  both  are  to  be  regarded  as  sources  of  the  truth,  and 
that  sometimes  the  one  and  sometimes  the  other  contains  the  genuine 
i-eading.  The  truth  in  any  particular  case  must  be  ascertained  by  the 
testimony  of  the  most  ancient  and  valuable  of  the  versions.  As  a  whole 
the  Jewish  Pentateuch  is  preferable  to  the  Samaritan,  the  various  read- 
ings of  which  are  frequently  "  the  effect  of  design,  or  of  want  of  gram- 
matical, exegetical,  or  critical  knowledge  ;  or  of  studious  conformity  to 
the  Samaritan  dialect ;  or  of  effort  to  remove  supposed  obscurities,  or  to 
restore  harmony  to  passages  apparently  discrepant."  North  American 
Review,  as  above  referred  to,  p.  278.     Tr.  T.] 


142   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 


CHAPTER  VII 


ON   THE   CRITICISM   OP   THE   TEXT. 


§  115.     Necessity  of  the  Criticism  of  the  Text. 

Since  the  editions  very  often  differ  from  each  other,  and  many  con- 
tain also  spurious  readings,  and  other  readings  of  great  number  are 
extant ;  the  exhibition  of  a  correct  text  should  be  the  first  object  of 
the  careful  attention  of  those  who  desire  to  understand  the  sacred 
scriptures  ;*  in  other  words,  the  interpreter  and  divine  stand  in  need 
of  the  art  of  criticism,  by  the  aid  of  which,  a  proper  judgment  may  he 
formed  of  various  readings,  the  spurious  may  he  discerned,  and  the 
genuine^  or  at  least  the  most  prohahle.  may  he  restored.  This  subject, 
which  involves  an  inquiry  respecting  fact,  namely,  what  the  author 
wrote,  may  be  compared  to  a  judicial  procedure,  in  which  the  critic 
sits  on  the  bench,  and  the  charge  of  corruption  in  the  reading  is 
brought  against  the  text.  The  witnesses,  from  whom  evidence  is  to 
be  obtained  respecting  what  the  author  wrote,  are  manuscript  copies, 
ancient  editions,  old  versions,  and  other  books  of  antiquity,  the  authors 
of  which  quoted  the  text  from  manuscripts.  But  since  these  wit- 
nesses are  often  at  variance  with  one  another,  and  very  frequently  it 
is  impossible  to  ascertain  the  truth  from  their  evidence  ;  it  is  neces- 
sary, as  is  usual  in  judicial  causes,  to  call  in  also  the  aid  of  argu- 
ments, drawn  from  the  very  nature  of  the  cause,  or  internal.  Such 
are, — the  facility  or  the  difficulty  of  a  more  modern  origin,  the  absence 
of  any  sense,  or  at  least  of  one  that  is  suitable,  the  agreement  or  dis- 
agreement of  a  reading  vidth  the  series  and  scope  of  the  discourse,  the 

*  [Codicibus  emendandis  primitus  debet  invigilare  solertia  eorum,  qui  scripturas- 
divinas  nosse  desideraot.   Augwstin.  de  doct,  Christ.  L.  II.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  143 

probabibty  or  improbability  of  any  particular  word  or  expression  having 
arisen  from  the  author,  and  the  correspondence  or  discrepancy  of 
parallel  places.  Lastly,  the  laws  by  which,  on  such  evidence,  the 
critic  is  guided  in  pronouncing  sentence,  are  the  rules  of  criticism. 

§  116.  Age  of  Manuscripts. 
In  order  to  form  a  proper  estimate  of  manuscripts  as  witnesses  to 
readings,  their  age  and  their  goodness,  or  freedom  from  corrup- 
tion, must  be  examined  ;  or,  which  rather  than  others  can  exhibit  the 
true  reading,  and  intend  faithfully  to  convey  it.  The  first  point  de- 
pends principally  on  the  age  ;  for  the  older  the  manuscript  is,  the 
more  readily  can  it  exhibit  the  truth,  because  it  is  free  from  the  errors 
which  have  crept  into  the  text  during  subsequent  ages  ;  unless  indeed 
a  more  modern  manuscript  should  happen  to  have  been  written  im- 
mediately from  one  of  very  great  antiquity.  In  very  many  manu- 
scripts the  age  is  added  ;  the  years  being  generally  reckoned  from 
the  creation  of  the  world,  omitting  the  thousands.     This  method  of 

reckoning  is  designated  by  pa'?,  that  is  pt3p  tOIsS,  according  to  the 

smaller  computation.  But  as  the  Jewish  chronology  is  deficient  240, 
or  as  some  say,  242  years,  these  as  well  as  6000  years  are  to  be  ad- 
ded to  the  date,  and  4000  being  taken  away  from  the  whole 
sum,  the  year  of  our  present  era  will  be  left.  In  a  few  manuscripts 
the  date  is  reckoned  according  to  the  era  of  contracts,  nntOC''?,  or  of 

the  SeleuddtB,*  beginning  311  years  before  Christ.  In  some  manu- 
scripts the  subscription  is  erroneous. 

It  is  difl[icult  to  ascertain  the  age  of  manuscripts  which  have  no  sub- 
scription determining  the  date.  For  the  indications  on  which  a  con- 
jecture respecting  the  age  is  to  be  founded  are  equivocal ;  for  in- 
stance, the  paleness  of  the  ink,  and  the  retouching  of  the  letters  by  a 
later  hand  ;  the  yellowish  colour  of  a  thick,  soft  and  much  worn  parch- 
ment ;  the  want  of  vowel  points,  of  the  Masora  and  of  the  K'ri  K'tib  5 
the  difference  of  ink  in  the  consonants  and  vowels  ;  the  shape  of  the 
letters,  &c.;  all  which  particulars  may  very  well  arise  from  causes 
which  have  no  necessary  connexion  vdth  the  date,  [a]     Kbnnicott, 

*  [eomp.  Prid.  Connex.  Part  I.  Book  VIII.  snb.  anno.  312.  Vol.  I.  p.  539.  s.  TV.  j 


144  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKh 

however,  Diss.  Gen.  p.  330—334.)  and  De  Rossi,  (Var.  Lee.  V.  T. 
T.  I.  Prol.  §  13.)  maintain,  that  when  all  these  indications  meet,[6] 
they  afford  proof  of  a  very  remote  age  of  the  manuscript.  Comp. 
ScHNURKEK  de  Codd.  Heb.  setate  difficulter  determinanda,  §  10 — 16. 
By  way  of  making  a  general  division  of  the  manuscripts,  De  Rossi 
calls  those  anterior  to  the  twelfth  century  the  most  ancient ;  those  of 
the  twelfth  and  thirteenth,  and  to  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth,  ancient : 
and  others,  to  the  end  of  the  fifteenth,  modem. 

[a)  This  opinion  is  elaborately  raaintaineci  by  Ttchsen  in  his  Ten- 
tamen  de  variis  codicum  Hebraicorum  Vet.  Test.  MSS.  generibus,  &c. 
8vo.  Roslochii.  1772.  pp.  258—322.  So  De  Wette,  Einleit.  J  112.  Tr.] 

[b)  These  supposed  marks  of  age,  kc.  are  enumerated  by  Jablonski, 
Praef.  ad  Bibl.  Heb.  §  35,  36,  37,  and  briefly  by  Horne,  Introd.  II.  p. 
37, 38.     TV.] 

§  117.     Goodness  of  Manuscn'pts.\(i\ 

Although  the  frequency  of  errors  of  the  pen  and  manifest  blunders 
in  any  manuscript  afford  sufficient  grounds  for  concluding  that  it  is 
not  to  be  relied  on  as  an  accurate  witness  of  the  truth,  yet  it  is  by  no 
means  to  be  inferred  from  the  paucity  of  evident  errors  of  the  pen  that 
the  manusci'ipt  deserves  impUcit  confidence.  This  only  shows  the 
very  particular  care  of  the  transcriber  of  that  manuscript,  but  does  not 
at  all  prove  that  the  manuscript  of  which  it  is  a  copy,  and  all  its  pre- 
decessors, had  been  written  with  equal  attention.  In  order  therefore 
to  examine  the  goodness  of  a  manuscript,  its  particular  readings  must 
be  compared  with  the  most  ancient  Avitnesses,  especially  the  old  ver- 
sions, and  if  it  be  found  to  agree  with  them,  it  may  reasonably  be  con- 
cluded, that  this  manuscript  and  all  its  predecessors  have  been  written 
with  skill  and  attention,  and  have  carefully  preserved  the  ancient 
readings. 

But  we  must  not  neglect  the  circumstance,  (which  has  been  al- 
ready stated,  §  111,  2.,)  that  the  manuscripts  of  different  countries 
have  from  the  eleventh  century  been  corrected  in  almost  every  pro- 
vince according  to  some  one  standard  manuscript  ;  and  that  for  this 
reason  those  of  each  province  agree  in  particular  readings,  and  conse- 
quently belong  to  one  and  the  same  family  or  recension,  and  in  relation 


tJF    THE   OLD    TESTAMENa.  145 

to  critical  purposes  can  only  be  considered  as  constituting  a  single 
testimony.  The  families  of  manuscripts,  which  are  distinguished  not 
only  by  their  readings  but  also  by  exterior  appearance,  are  three  or 

four. 1)     The  Spanish,  which  were  corrected  according  to  the 

Hillel  manuscript,  and  accurately  follow  the  Masora.  They  are 
therefore  very  highly  prized  by  the  Jews,  but  critics  consider  them 
as  of  little  value.  Their  characters  are  perfectly  square,  simple 
and  elegant,  very  much  like  those  in  the  editions  of  Plantin  &.  Ste- 
phens ;  the  ink  is  pale  ;  the  pages  are  seldom  divided  into  three 
columns ;  the  Psalms  are  written  in  hemistichs,  and  the  Chaldee 
paraphrases  are  not  interlinear,  but  placed  in  separate  columns,  or  in 

small  letters  in  the  margin. 2)     The  Oriental  are  so  similar  to 

the  Spanish,  that  both  might  be  assigned  to  the  same  class. 3) 

The  German  pay  very  little  regard  to  the  Masora,  and  therefore 
they  are  disesteemed  by  the  Jews  and  highly  valued  by  the  critics. 
Their  letters  are  rude,  round  and  badly  formed,  similar  to  those  in 
Munster's  edition,  printed  in  1  Ftf^f,  at  Basil ;  the  initial  letters  are  large 
and  ornamented  ;  the  matres  lectionis  frequently  occur  ;  the  ink  is 

very  black  and  the  Chaldee  paraphrases  interlinear. 4)     The 

Italian  manuscripts  occupy  a  middle  place  between  the  Spanish  and 
German,  both  as  respects  conformity  to  the  Masora,  and  also  as  to 
the  shape  of  the  letters.  Specimens  of  Spanish,  German  and  Italian 
characters  in  copper  plates  have  been  published  by  Bruns  in  his  edi- 
tion of  Kennicott's  Dissertatio  Generalis,  printed  at  Brunswick  in 
1783  ;  but  in  manuscripts  the  shape  is  by  no  means  always  exactly  the 
same,  but  very  frequently,  as  my  own  examination  has  assured  me,  so 
various,  as  to  make  it  impossible  to  form  a  decided  judgment  respect- 
ing them. 

[a)  De  Wette  Einleit.  §  108 — 114,  is  well  worth  consulting  on  this 
subject.  TscHSENi  Tentamen,  &c.  passim,  has  much  curious  and  valua- 
ble matter,  with  a  considerable  mixture  of  fanciful  hypothesis.     Tr.] 

§   118.     Authoritif  of  the  ancient  editions. 

The  first  and  fundamental  editions  are  of  equal  authority  with  the 
manuscript  copies  from  which  they  were  derived.  Almost  all  the 
other  editions  owe  their  origin  either  to  that  of  Soncino,  1488.  to 

19 


146   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKb 

that  of  Brescia,  1494,  to  the  Complutensian  Polyglot,  1517,  or  lastly 
to  the  Bomberg  edition  of  1525,  or  its  reprint,  1647—9  ;  and  almost 
all  are  masoretical,  a  few  excepted,  in  which  some  corrections  have 
been  introduced  from  manuscripts.  Among  the  latter  De  Rossi 
reckons  all  which  preceded  the  second  Bomberg  edition,  that  of 
1525 — 6  ;  all  the  later  editions  he  calls  masoretic.  Those  not  ma- 
soretic  are  the  more  valuable. 

§  119.     Authority  of  the  ancient  versions. 

No  manuscripts  older  than  the  11th  century  remain,  to  afford  evi- 
dence of  the  readings  of  the  period  which  elapsed  between  the  time 
of  the  sacred  writers  themselves  and  that  age.  Versions,  however, 
arc  extant,  the  authors  of  which,  agreeably  to  the  practice  of  their 
age,  made  u?e  of  ancient  and  accurate  manuscripts,  and  expressed 
the  readings  of  them  in  their  versions.  The  test«imony,  therefore,  of 
the  ancient  translators  respecting  readings  is  as  valuable  as  that  of 
the  ancient  manuscripts  which  they  used  ;  that  is,  provided  their 
translations  show  with  certainty  the  readings  of  their  manuscripts. 
If  these  cannot  be  traced  with  certainty,  or  are  completely  out  of 
the  reach  of  conjecture,  the  authority  of  the  versions  is  diminished, 
or  entirely  destroyed.  This  generally  happens  in  the  folio vdng 
instances. 

1)  When  the  question  is  respecting  readings  which  do  not  alter 
the  sense. 2)  When  the  readings  under  discussion  are  very  un- 
important, which  the  translator  might  neglect  in  his  version  although 
he  did  read  them  in  his  manuscript ;  as  in  the  case  of  the  connect- 
ing particle  i.     On  the  other  hand  if  the  translator  has  introduced 

such  readings  he  may  have  found  them  in  his  manuscript. 3)  But 

a  translator  might  also  add,  not  only  a  word  of  little  moment,  but 
also  a  word  or  phrase  of  considerable  importance,  for  the  sake  of 
explanation,  so  that  his  evidence  could  hardly  be  admitted  in  such  a 
case,  unless  the  word  were  found  in  some  manuscript  not  under  any 
suspicion  of  having  been  altered ;  or  unless  some  other  reason  ap- 
plied, as  where  the  versions  of  alphabetical  Psalms  exhibit  a  member 
which  has  been  lost  from  the  Hebrew  text,  as  Ps.  xxxvii.  28,  cxlv.  14. 
4)  When  a  translator  has  made  any  change  in  order  to  accom- 
modate the  discourse  to  the  genius  of  his  own  language,  or  to  ex- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.                               147 
plain  the  subject  more  clearly,  his  testimony  is  to  be  rejected. 


5)  If  an  obscure  or  difficult  word,  which  the  translator  did  not  per- 
haps understand,  has  been  omitted,  or  conjecturally  translated,  it  is 
not  to  be  inferred  that  it  did  not  exist  in  his  manuscript,  or  that  it 

was  differently  written. 6)  Tf  the  translator  has  paraphrased,  or 

expressed  the  sense  merely,  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  he  had  read 
in  his  manuscript  other  words  than  those  which  are  now  extant,  and 
frequently  it  is  not  easy  to  conjecture  what  he  did  read :  as  a  witness 

therefore  he  is  of  no  authority. Hence  it  is  evident  that  versions 

which  render  the  original  word  for  word,  afford  more  assistance  to 
the  critic  than  those  which  only  give  the  sense. 

The  versions  themselves  indeed  are  by  no  means  free  from  errors 
and  various  readings  ;  yet  these  are  not  the  same  as  the  various 
readings  of  the  Hebrew,  nor  do  they  occur  in  the  same  places,  and 
consequently  their  testimony  is  not  thereby  invalidated.  The  medi- 
ate versions,  the  authors  of  which  neither  examined  nor  understood 
Hebrew  manuscripts,  express  no  more  than  their  testimony  concern- 
ing the  readings  of  that  version  from  which  they  were  drawn.  But 
if  a  version  made  immediately  from  the  original  appears  to  be  related 
in  certain  places  to  another  version,  its  testimony  with  regard  to  the 
reading  in  those  places  is  suspicious.  Such  a  connexion  may  arise 
from  a  translator's  having  often  consulted  a  version,  as  Theodotion 
and  probably  also  the  Syriac  translator  have  the  Septuagint,  or  from 
one  version's  being  altered  to  correspond  with  another.  When  an 
ancient  version,  has  in  an  age  more  modern  than  that  in  which  it  was 
originally  composed,  been  remodelled  in  some  places  according  to 
the  Hebrew  text,  its  evidence  in  such  places  is  more  modern,  and 
cannot  possess  the  same  weight  as  the  rest  of  the  text.  This  obser- 
vation applies  to  some  passages  of  the  Targums,  and  of  the  Vulgate. 

The  Antiquities  of  Josephus  may  in  a  very  great  degree  be  reck- 
oned among  the  mediate  versions,  for  this  work  was  drawn  from  the 
Alexandrine.  But  in  places  where  it  differs  remarkably  from  that 
version,  Josephus  examined  Hebrew  manuscripts,  and  his  testimony 
in  relation  to  the  reading  of  the  Hebrew  text,  is  of  the  greatest 
weight. 


148  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

§   120,     Quotations  in  the  New  Testament. [a\ 

The  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  which  are  found  in  the 
New,  are  taken  for  the  most  part  from  the  Alexandrine  version,  and 
afibrd  testimony  respecting  its  readings.  But  those  which  are  deri- 
ved from  the  Hebrew  text  are  evidence  of  the  reading  of  the  He- 
brew manuscripts  of  that  age.  Sometimes  a  passage  is  cited  from 
the  Alexandrine  version,  but  as  he  who  is  introduced  as  speaking  did 
not  use  the  Greek  but  the  Aramaean  language,  and  quoted  either  the 
Hebrew  text  itself  or  a  translation  of  it  into  the  Aramaean,  it  is  plain 
that  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  also  at  that  time  exhibited  the  reading 
given.  This  apphes  to  Acts  xv.  17,  compared  with  Amos  ix.  12. 
But  it  is  worthy  of  observation,  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment frequently  give  the  sense  of  a  place  without  regarding  the 
words,  or  connect  several  places  in  one  continuous  discourse,  as  in 
Rom.  iii.  11 — 18  ;  in  such  cases  we  are  not  to  conclude  that  their 
manuscripts  differed  from  ours.  The  quotation  in  Matt,  xxvii.  9, 
from  Zech.  xi.  12,  13,  which  is  of  this  kind,  is  worthy  of  particular 
attention.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  p.  448,  and  Append.  Herm.  Fasc.  I. 
p.  256—267. 

[a)  A  very  full  list  of  the  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
New,  arranged  in  classes,  is  given  by  Horne,  Introd.  Part  I.  c.  ix.  J  1. 
Vol.  II.  pp.  343 — 433:  and  the  Junior  Class  in  the  Theological  Semi- 
nary, Andover,  have  published  the  "  Citations  of  the  Old  Testament  by 
the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  compared  with  the  original  Hebrew 
and  the  Septuagint  version,  under  the  superintendence  of  M.  Stuart, 
Associate  Professor  of  Sacred  Literature,  1827."  This  will  be  found  a 
very  convenient  and  useful  work  to  persons  wishing  to  form  an  acquaint- 
ance with  the  subject.    Tr.] 

§  121.     Quotations  in  the  Talmud. 

The  places  which  are  cited  in  the  Talmud  were  taken  fiom  manu- 
scripts belonging  to  the  period  between  the  end  of  the  second  and 
the  end  of  the  fifth  centuries,  or  somewhat  more  ancient ;  and  their 
testimony  is  equivalent  to  that  of  those  manuscripts,  and  increases  in 
weight  where  it^agrees  with  the  versions  against  the  Masoretic  text ; 
as  in  Ps.  xvi.  10.  quoting  'JT'DH  for  -yT'Dn,  and  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  nba^ 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  149 

tbi*  riV!i>.     But  all  the  discrepancies  of  the  Talmudists  from  the  Ma- 

soretic  text  are  not  to  be  considered  as  various  readings,  for  these 
writers  often  give  the  sense  of  a  place,  neglecting  the  language,  or 
they  mutilate  the  text,  or  designedly  omit  certain  words  or  add  them, 
or  combine  together  many  places  ;  not  unfrequently,  they  merely  al- 
lude to  some  passage,  or,  in  order  to  press  out  a  paronomasia,  make 
some  alteration  in  the  text,  and  direct  it  to  be  read  in  some  particu- 
lar way  although  not  so  written  in  the  manuscripts.  It  is  necessary 
therefore  to  be  cautious  in  using  the  testimony  of  the  Talmudic  wri- 
ters. See  BuxTORF  in  his  Tiberias,  L.  I.  C.  9.  p.  20,  Basil.  1656. 
Capel.  Crit.  Sac.  T.  II.  L.  V.  c.  12.  §  4.  p.  901. 

§  122.     Testimony  of  the  Masora. 

Although  the  Masora  has  stricken  out  of  the  text  many  good  read- 
ings, or  has  left  them  in  only  a  few  manuscripts,  yet  it  has  also  pre- 
served many  good  readings  which  have  perished  from  manuscripts  or 
have  been  retained  in  very  few  ;  as  for  instance  nxo  Ps.  xxii.  17,  (16,) 

which  is  noted  in  the  Masora  on  Num.  xxiv.  9.  Its  testimony  is  of 
equal  weight  with  that  of  the  manuscripts  from  which  the  readings 
were  taken,  that  is,  of  manuscripts  from  the  6th  to  the  10th  centu- 
ries inclusive.  But  it  must  be  observed,  that  if  the  Masora  agree 
with  the  Talmudists  and  with  the  manuscripts,  it  constitutes  along 
with  them  only  a  single  testimony  ;  but  if  it  differs  from  them,  it  af- 
fords an  independent  evidence. 

The  notes  called  np  kVi  (Comp.  §  107.),  mentioned  in  the  Jeru- 
salem Tahnud  and  repeated  in  the  Masora,  are  mostly  various  read- 
ings, of  which  the  one  marked  in  the  margin  is  directed  to  be  pre- 
ferred. But  this  direction  does  not  bind  the  critic,  who  cannot 
possibly  judge  of  manuscripts  which  those  Jews  did  not  even  name : 
he  must  pronounce  sentence  on  the  testimony  of  versions  and  manu- 
scripts, or  from  internal  arguments. 

§  123.     Quotations  in  Rabbinical  Writers. 

The  learned  Jews  who  flourished  particularly  from  the  1 1th  to  the 
1 5th  centuries,  took  the  passages  of  the  Bible  which  they  quote  from 


150  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

manuscripts  of  their  own  age  or  somewhat  more  ancient,  and  the 
readings  cited  by  them  possess  the  same  authority  as  the  manuscripts 
of  those  times.  But  since  in  that  period  the  text  had  aheady  been  re- 
duced into  the  Masoretical  form,  their  citations  also  generally  cor- 
respond to  our  text,  although  some  important  discrepancies  are 
observable,  which  are  of  the  greater  consequence  because  they  are 
repugnant  to  the  Masora  and  Targums,  and  coincide  with  the  most 
ancient  versions  :  as  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  nbc'  and  ISC'  for  nS'tl',  Comp. 
my  Heb.  Bib.  T.  I.  p.  117. 

With  respect  to  quotations  in  Rabbinical  writers  the  same  caution 
is  necessary  which  has  been  recommended  in  relation  to  Talmudical ; 
that  is  to  say,  every  aberration  from  the  received  text  is  not  to  be 
added  to  the  various  readings.  For  frequently  they  merely  exhibit 
the  sense,  or  only  allude  to  a  place,  or  give  the  words  of  the  text 
somewhat  inaccurately  through  a  failure  of  memory,  and  they  not 
only  omit  or  commute  some  words,  but  also  add  others :  from  such 
quotations  it  is  not  allowable  to  force  out  various  readings.  In  pro- 
portion therefore  as  the  probability  increases,  that  the  authors  wrote 
out  the  words  of  the  text  from  manuscripts  which  themselves  had  ex- 
amined, their  testimony  is  the  more  important.  This  remark  applies 
to  commentaries,  and  especially  if  it  appear  from  the  explanation 
itself,  what  reading  exclusive  of  any  other  was  used  by  the  author,  so 
that  there  can  be  no  room  for  suspecting  the  words  to  have  been  al- 
tered by  transcribers  or  editors.  Thus,  in  Bereshith  Rabba,  Tan- 
chuma  and  Jarchi,  in  Gen.  xlix.  10,  iW  is  not  only  written,  but  also 
explained. 

Those  of  the  Rabbins  who  are  critics,  as  R.  Meir,  son  of  Todros, 
called  also  Todrosius  and  Harama,  of  the  13th  century,  R.  Menahem 
de  Lonzano,  and  R.  Solomon  Norzi,  both  of  the  1 6th,  constantly  pro- 
duce vaiious  readings  from  very  old  manuscripts,  which  however 
scarcely  exceed  the  llth  century.  These  readings  are  not  to  be 
despised,  although  the  greater  part  of  them  are  of  httle  importance. 
Comp.  De  Rossi  Var.  Lect.  Vol.  I.  Proleg.  §  36—38,  p.  39—43. 
Simon,  Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  Tom.  I.  p.  363.  ss.  Capel.  Crit.  Sac. 
T.  II.  L.  V.  C.  12.  §  22—28,  p.  919—924.  Rosen.  Handbuch  fiiv 
Hie  Lit.  der  Bibl.  Krit.  und  Exeg,  II.  Th.  S.  77.  ff. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  151 

§  124.     Quotations  in  the  Fathers. 

Ecclesiastical  writers  took  the  places  of  Scripture  which  they 
quote  from  the  version  of  their  church,  and  consequently  their  tes- 
timony can  extend  no  further  than  to  the  readings  of  that  version. 
Origen  and  Jerome  are  the  only  fathers  who  certainly  made  use  of 
Hebrew  manuscripts,  and  their  evidence  is  equivalent  to  that  of 
manuscripts  of  their  age.  If  any  others  appeal  to  the  Hebrew  text, 
they  drew  their  remarks  chiefly  from  Origen  and  Jerome. 

§  125.     Collections  of  Various  Readings. 

Human  life  is  too  short  to  allow  of  a  thorough  examination  of  all 
those  monuments  which  are  indispensably  necessary  to  criticism,  in 
addition  to  the  many  other  subjects  which  are  equally  worthy  of  at- 
tention. But  as  many  learned  men  have  from  time  to  time  investi- 
gated different  documents;  extensive  collections  of  various  readings 
have  at  length  arisen,  of  which  the  critic  should  avail  himself.  Some 
beginnings  were  made  by  those  ancient  Jews,  to  whom  we  owe  the 
rejections  and  corrections  of  the  Scribes,  and  other  observations  be- 
fore noticed.  See  §  107.  More  recently  Todrozius,  Menahem  and 
Norzi  have  collected  larger  apparatus.  Ken.  Diss.  Gen.  p.  Ill — 
131.  De  Rossi,  p.  39 — 43.  Munster  was  the  fii-st  among  Christians 
who  in  his  edition  of  1 536  added  some  various  readings.  Not  many 
more  are  found  in  that  of  Van  der  Hooght,  1705  ;  but  in  the  edition 
of  John  Henry  Michaelis,  1720,  the  various  readings  of  five  manu- 
scripts and  nineteen  editions  are  exhibited,  and  that  not  only  in  the 
letters,  but  also  in  the  vowel  points  and  accents. 

These  were  imperfect  beginnings.  In  1753,  Houbigant,  a  priest 
of  the  Oratory,  published  a  critical  edition  of  the  Old  Testament  accord- 
ing to  the  text  of  Van  der  Hooght,  but  greatly  corrected.  By  this  at- 
tempt, the  learned  were  animated  to  a  more  careful  examination  of  the 
character  of  the  Hebrew  text.  The  result  was  many  collations  of 
Hebrew  manuscripts,  until  by  the  efforts  of  Kennicott  a  comparison 
was  made  through  the  whole  of  Europe,  and  at  length  his  edition  ap- 
peared, which,  following  Van  der  Hooght's  text,  contained  various 
readings  from  615  manuscripts,  from  52  editions,  and  from  both  the 
Talmuds.     It  was  pubhshed  in  2  vol?,  folio,   1776—80,  at  Oxford. 


152      GENERAL    INTRODUCTION    TO  THE    SACRED    BOOKS 

KfiNN.  Diss.  Gen.  edit.  Bruns.  p.  279 — 329.  Comp.  Mich.  Orient. 
Bibl.  IX.  Th.  S.  91— 131.  XIII.  Th.  S.  170  ff.  XVIII.  Th.  S.  138, 
141,  160,  164.  XXI.  Th.  S.  63.  XXII.  Th.  S.  177.  Eichh.  Repert. 
XII.  Th.  S.  226.  Rosen.  Hand,  fur  die  Lit.  der  Bibl.  Krit.  und 
Exeg.  1.  S.  241—248. 

Dk  Rossi  selected  from  this  apparatus  the  more  important  read- 
ings, and  after  comparing  731  other  manuscripts  and  300  editions, 
and  examining  fully  the  ancient  versions  and  books  of  the  Rabbins 
even  in  manuscript,  he  published  all  the  various  readings  which  he  had 
observed  in  4  vols.  4to.  in  1784 — 88,  at  Parma,  to  v^fhich  in  1798 
he  added  a  supplement  or  Critical  Scholia.  It  is  to  be  lamented  that 
De  Rossi,  as  he  himself  confesses,  Vol.  IV.  Diss.  Prael.  p.  19.  col.  2., 
did  not  examine  his  materials  throughout,  but  confined  himself  chiefly 
to  an  inspection  of  those  places  in  which  Kennicott  and  some  other 
critics  had  noted  variety. 

From  the  apparatus  thus  prepared,  Doedeklein,  and  upon  his  death 
Meisner,  undertook  the  publication  of  a  manual  edition  of  the  Old 
Testament,  which  was  printed  in  1793.  But  as  the  print  was  small 
and  inaccurate,  another  manual  edition  was  published  by  myself  at 
Vienna  8vo.  in  1806.* 

The  apparatus  already  collected  is  indeed  very  great ;  yet  much  re- 
mains to  be  done  in  order  to  bring  the  criticism  of  the  O.  T.  to  perfec- 
tion. The  manuscripts  have  not  been  accurately  described,  nor  reduced 
into  families ;  most  of  them  have  only  been  examined  in  certain  places, 
and  not  collated  throughout,  which  is  the  case  with  almost  all  those  of 
De  Rossi ;  complete  extracts  have  not  yet  been  made  from  the  Masora ; 
most  of  the  versions  still  require  the  aid  of  a  critic,  and  after  they  have 
been  corrected  they  should  be  compared  throughout.  The  accomplish- 
ment of  these  and  many  other  requisites  must  be  left  to  posterity. 

§  126.     Of  Internal  Critical  Evidence. 

The  principal  arguments  in  relation  to  the  genuineness  of  readings 
are  external,  or  those  afforded  by  the  witnesses  to  whom  what  has 
been  already  said  relates.  But  since  it  frequently  happens  that  these 
witnesses  are  contradictory,  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  found  a  judg- 

+  fSee^  113  at  the  end.     TV.] 


QF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  153 

ment  on  their  authority  ;  it  becomes  necessaiy,  in  order  to  decide  the 
question,  to  call  in  the  aid  of  internal  arguments.  Of  these  the  chief 
are,  such  as  are  drawn  from  the  various  methods  in  which  spurious 
readings  arise  ;  for  in  proportion  to  the  difficulty  with  which  a  reading 
could  have  arisen  from  any  other  is  the  probability  of  its  having  des- 
cended from  the  writer  himself;  and  in  proportion  to  the  ease  with 
which  it  might  arise  from  another  reading  docs  it  betray  a  more  recent 
origin,  and  its  incorrectness.  In  order  to  make  a  proper  use  of  these 
arguments,  it  is  necessary  carefully  to  draw  from  experience  the 
various  methods  by  which  errors  are  produced.  It  is  quite  clear  that 
spurious  readings  arise  from  two  sources,  namely,  from  errors  of 

the  pen,  and  from  the  erroneous  judgment  of  the  transcribers. ^1) 

Errors  of  the  pen  are  of  a  fourfold  kind,  a)  such  as  07nit,  b)  such  as 
add,  c)  such  as  transpose,  and  d)  such  as  alter.  Alterations 
moreover    proceed  either    from   an    error   of  the  sight,  or,   when 

written  by  dictation,  of  the  hearing,  ox  of  the  memory. 2)  Through 

erroneous  judgment,  passages  are  either  a)  altered  from  others  which 
are  parallel,  or  b)  perverted  from  their  true  meaning  in  consequence 
of  abbreviations  in  the  writing  being  incorrectly  understood,  or,  c)  inar- 
ginal  notes  are  introduced  into  the  series  of  discourse,  or  lastly,  d) 
what  is  really  right  is  supposed  to  be  erroneous  and  improperly  cor- 
rected.— It  is  intended  to  treat  of  all  these  points  in  order. 

§  127.     Errors  which  are  committed  by  omission.[a\ 

Transcribers  readily  omit  a  letter,  a  syllable,  a  word,  and  even  a 
sentence  and  period,  especially  when  ojuuoiorsXsura  take  place,  i.  e. 
when  the  beginning  or  the  end  of  the  following  sentence  or  period  is 
the  same  or  similar.    Thus  in  II  Sam.  xxiii.  20.  -n  occurs  for  b'n,  as 

It  is  in  the  parallel  place,  I  Chron.  xi.  22  ;  in  Lament,  ii.  4.  ^73  for 
^;?J  h2,  as  preserved  in  the  Targum  ;  whole  sentences  are  omitted  in 

Ps.  XXV.  5.  cxlv.  13  ;  an  omission  on  account  of  similar  terminations 
is  found  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  28,  where  nott'J  D'Slj?  is  omitted  fi-om  its  simi- 
larity to  noK/J  aSiy'7'  though  preserved  by  the  Alexandrine  version. 
Omissions  in  manuscripts  are  so  numerous  that  they  are  generally  to 
be  considered  as  mere  errors  of  the  pen,  unless  they  occur  in  manu- 

30 


154       (iENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  HOOKS 

scripts  very  accurately  written,  which  is  but  seldom  the  case.  Hence 
a  large  number  of  witnesses  declaring  in  favour  of  an  omission  prove 
nothing,  and  a  few  witnesses  are  sufficient  authority  to  restore  what 
has  been  omitted.  Indeed  even  one  witness  may  evince  its  genuine- 
ness, if  other  internal  arguments  of  weight  can  be  alleged. 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  section,  Kewwicott's  Two  Dissertations 
on  the  State  of  the  Hebrew  Text,  may  be  profitably  consulted.  See 
the  Indexes,  article  Omissions ;  and  on  the  whole  subject  of  the  causes 
of  corruption,  comp.  Bauer,  \  20—23,  p.  168—195,  and  Eichhorit, 
$  84—108.     TV,] 

§  128.     I^rors  which  have  arisen  from  additions. \a\ 

The  rule  respecting  omissions,  however,  is  by  no  means  to  be 
urged  to  a  very  great  degree,  because  transcribers  may  readily  add  a 
letter,  or  syllable,  or  word  ;  although  no  one  could  easily  add  a  whole 
sentence  through  an  error  of  the  pen.  An  addition  also  might  arise 
from  the  circumstance  of  the  transcriber's  having  written  an  errone- 
ous letter,  or  syllable,  or  word,  from  his  copy,  although  condemned 
by  a  fine  stroke  or  point.  Sometimes  it  must  remain  uncertain 
whether  the  omission  or  addition  be  the  more  probable,  unless  other 
arguments  can  be  obtained  to  assist  in  forming  a  judgment.  The 
moAres  lectionis  which  are  occasionally  of  great  importance,  transcri- 
bers have  been  accustomed  to  insert  or  omit  at  pleasure,  and  some- 
times to  introduce  them  in  an  improper  place  :  hence  nS'tt'  in  Gen. 
xlix.  10.  for  nSty.  To  the  same  cause  is  to  be  traced  the  Arabic 
orthography  which  is  at  times  to  be  met  with,  as  DNp  for  Dp  in  Hos, 

X.  14.  If,  however,  this  orthography  is  of  frequent  occurrence  in 
any  book,  as  for  instance  in  Job,  it  undoubtedly  proceeds  from  the 
author  ;  because  no  reason  can  be  given  why  transcribers  should 
have  so  frequently  introduced  a  foreign  orthography  in  this  book  in 
particular.  But  it  is  unquestionable,  that  careless  transcribers  have 
often  added  the  article  n,  the  n  paragogic,  and  the  particles  m  and 

hb.  See  Isa.  xxix.  II.  Mic.  iii.  2.  I  Sam.  xxvi.  22.  II  Kings 
vii.  13. 

[a)    See  Kennicott'b  Two  Dissertations  ;   Indexes,  article  Inset' 
tioriK.     7V.1 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  155 

§  129.     Transpositions. 

Transcribers  are  also  apt  to  transpose  letters,  words,  or  sentences. 
Thus  in  Eccles.  ix.  4.  -my  is  read  for  1311%  which  is  given  in  the 

Alexandrine  version  and  the  Targum,  and  is  required  by  the  series 
of  the  discourse  ;  and  in  II  Sam.  xxi.  19.  DUlk  occurs  after  nj>', 

having  been  transferred  from  the  hne  below. Transpositions  of 

verses  may  be  found  in  Lament,  c.  ii.  iii.  and  iv.,  of  the  letters  y  and 
3  ;  and  Kennicott  refers  to  manuscripts  in  which  psalms  and  chap- 
ters of  books  are  transposed,  Diss.  Gen.  p.  42 — 47. 

§  130.     Changes  produced  by  errors  of  the  sigJu. 

Letters  or  words  are  often  changed  through  an  error  of  the  sight, 
and  from  this  cause  very  many  various  readings  have  arisen.  In 
order  to  judge  of  these  it  is  necessary  to  notice  the  similarity  of  let- 
ters, and  the  possibiUty  of  one  letter  being  mistaken  for  two,  or  two 
for  one,  and  thus  affording  occasion  fojr  a  change.  Thus  in  Ps.  xi.  1, 
03"in  has  been  interchanged  with  1D3  "^n,  which  the  Alexandrine  ver- 
sion expresses.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  more  ancient  form  of 
the  letters  is  unknown,  from  which  the  oldest  various  readings  might 
be  explained.  Discrepancies,  however,  of  ancient  date  occur,  ari- 
sing from  the  change  of  letters  which  are  now  similar,  as  in  Josh. 
XV.  47,  Snjn?  kWi,  Snjn.     From  this  source  have  flowed  many  and 

great  errors  in  numbers,  which  were  formerly  expressed  by  letters,  a 
commutation  of  which  might  easily  produce  those  immense  numbers 
which  are  so  often  to  be  met  with  in  the  historical  books.  Thus  in 
II  Chron.  xxii,  2,  2D  22  has  been  changed  into  Dn  42,  as  is  evident 
from  II  Kings  viii.  26.  Comp.  also  II  Chron.  xiii.  3.  xiv.  7,  8,  (8,  9.) 
xvii.  13—19.  [a]  « 

[a)    See  Kenwicott's    Two  Dissertatations  ;    Diss.   I.  pp.  96.  ss. 
462.  S3.  472.  s.,  comp,  also  pp.  529.  ss„  and  Diss.  II.  pp.  208—221,  and        . 
r>12,  ss.     7V.1 


15H     GEiNERAL  INTRODUCTION   TO  THE    SACRED    BOOKS 

§  131.     Changes  arising  from  a  failure  of  memory. 

Since  transcribers  would  naturally  look  at  the  copy,  and  take 
several  words  at  once  to  be  afterwards  written  down,  occasional 
slips  of  memory  would  give  rise  to  other  words,  especially  to  such  as 
are  synonymous  or  similar.  From  this  cause  commutations  of  parti- 
cles often  occur,  as  of  Sn  and  |D  with  the  prefixes  Lamed  and  Mem, 

of  kS  with  bx  and  S3.  So  also  there  is  sometimes  an  interchange  of 
'iDK''i  and  13^1.  In  II  Sam.  xxii.  1,  ten  manuscripts  have  f]3m  for 
TD» ;  and  on  the  contrary  in  Ps.  xviii.  1,  many  read  tdi  for  t]3Di. 
Hence  also  the  frequent  interchanges  of  the  names  of  God,  nin%  Oix 
and  dtiSn  :  for  since  the  Jews  for  2000  years  past  have  constantly 
read  'nx  for  mn'j  or  where  both  occur  in  connexion,  DTi^N  ;  trans- 
cribers may  not  unfrequently  have  written  from  memory  these  two 
words  instead  of  the  other.  Comp.  Capel.  Crit.  Sac.  T.  I.  L.  I. 
c.  iii.  p.  45—47.   109—112. 

§  132.     Changes  from  an  etr or  in  hearing. 

If  a  book  were  dictated  to  several  transcribers,  one  or  other  of 
them  would  sometimes  hear  a  word  incorrectly,  and  write  another  of 
similar  sound.  This  seems  to  be  the  cause  of  those  17  commuta- 
tions of  «V  with  h,  which  are  noted  in  the  Treatise  Sopherim  and  in 
the  margin  of  our  Bibles  ;  and  also  of  He  with  Aleph,   as  Dinx  in 

I  Kings  xii.  18.  and  onnn  in  II  Chron.  x.  18  ;  and  O'D^N  in  II  Kings 

viii.  28.  and  D'a'in  in  II  Chron.  xxii.  5. 

§  133.     AMerations  from  parallel  places. 

Parallel  passages  have  furnished  a  most  abundant  source  of  altera- 
tions. In  some  instances,  such  passages,  being  very  familiar  to  the 
transcriber,  have  crept  into  the  text  without  his  knowledge  or  inten- 
tion. In  others  inconsiderate  transcribers  have  corrupted  a  text 
because  they  have  deemed  it  necessary  to  render  it  conformable  to  a 
parallel  passage.     Thus  the  7th  and  8th  verses  of  II  Kings  Us..,  are 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  I5ll 

introduced  in  Isa.  xxxviii,  and  thrust  into  an  improper  place  after  v. 
20,  when  they  should  have  been  written  after  ».  6.     Thus  also  loS  ij? 

in  Ps.  xxviii.  8.,  is  in  some  manuscripts  changed  into  ioyh  ry  from 

Ps.  xxix.  11.  Alterations  of  this  kind  however  are  not  to  be  un- 
necessarily multiplied,  since  the  very  numerous  discrepancies  be- 
tween the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  and  those  of  Chronicles,  show 
that  transcribers  have  not  always  indulged  their  inclinations  in  har- 
monizing parallel  places. 

§  134.     Abbreviations  incorrectly  understood. 

Although  abbreviations  are  of  infrequent  occurrence  in  Hebrew 
manuscripts,  yet  there  are  some,  which  occasionally  appear  to  have 
been  incorrectly  understood.  Thus  the  abbreviation  which  is  used 
in  the  Targums  for  the  name  Jehovah, '',  seems  to  have  been  found  by 
the  Alexandrine  translator  of  Jonah,  in  i.  9,  where  instead  of  "^3jr,  a 

Hebrew,  it  would  appear  that  he  read  'n^y,  and  incorrectly  transla- 
ted it  5sXoff  fAs,  as  if  it  were  intended  for  n^j;  and  not  nin'  naj^.     So 

also  in  Jer.  vi.  11,  'mdh.  meant  as  an  abbreviation  for  rriiT'  nnn,  ap- 
pears to  have  been  read  'nnn,  Su|xov  fj,s.  The  manuscript  of  Kenni- 
cott,  marked  76,  often  omits  the  last  letters,  as  'i2H  for  ^jTinx,  ''tS'fD 
for  ytyiD,  'iD3  for  mnn.  In  this  way  D'O  has  arisen  in  Ps.  cvii.  3, 
from  the  abbreviation  'o"'D  for  po'D. 

§  135.     Marginal  notes  introduced  into  the  text. 

'The  explanatory  and  traditionary  notes  which  are  so  common  in 
the  margin  of  manuscripts,  have  been  sometimes  considered  by  tran- 
scribers as  a  part  of  the  discourse,  and  introduced  into  the  text. 
Thus  in  Isa.  xl.  7.  D^n  T'Vn  pN,  truly  the  people  is  grass,  seems  to  be 

an  interpolation  of  this  kind,  as  it  is  wanting  in  the  Septuagint ;  and 
in  vii.  17.  ^wa  ^Sd  na,  the  king  of  Assyria.     Such  is  also  the  case 

with  I  Sam.  vi.  19.  b^-'K  s^Sx  O'B'Dn,  50,000  men,  which  is  not  accord- 


158  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

ing  to  the  order  of  numbering,  and  is  wanting  in  Josephtjs,  Ant.  VI, 
ii.  4, [a]  Larger  portions  also  have  been  introduced  in  the  first  book 
of  Samuel,  (xvu.  12—31,  50,  65—58,  xviii.  1—6,  9—11,  17—19.) 
which  did  not  exist  in  the  manuscript  used  by  the  Alexandrine  trans- 
lator, but  were  introduced  into  his  version,  as  is  evident  from  many 
Paris  manuscripts,  from  versions  of  the  second  century,  by  Origen. 
They  seem  to  have  been  taken  from  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase,  as  the 
Targmn  of  Jonathan  on  these  passages  contains  many  other  things  of 
the  same  kind.  However  this  may  be,  they  do  not  belong  to  the 
text ;  for  they  are  at  variance  with  the  context  both  preceding  and 
subsequent,  as  has  been  remarked  by  Houbigant  on  I  Sam.  xvii. 
11.  [6]  So  also  much  has  been  interpolated  in  Jeremiah  which  was 
not  read  by  the  Alexandrine  translator. 

[o)  See  Le  Clerc  and  Dathe,  in  loc.     TV.] 

[b)  See   Germ.  Introd.   P.   I.    J  135.    S.    480.  f.  Eichhorn  II.  Th. 
S.  532.  fF.  Bertholdt  III.  Th.  s.  897.     Tr.] 

§  136.     Improper  division  of  words. 

Although  the  oriental  writers  left  spaces  between  the  words,  or 
made  use  of  points  in  order  to  indicate  the  end  of  each  word,  it  fre- 
quently happened,  that  through  the  haste  or  carelessness  of  the  tran- 
scribers they  were  neglected,  and  words  were  connected.  These, 
being  separated  again  by  other  transcribers,  have  been  sometimes 
inaccurately  divided,  so  as  to  connect  with  a  preceding  word  a  letter 
which  belonged  to  the  following,  or  the  reverse.  Sometimes,  also, 
improperly,  a  word  has  been  separated  into  two,  or  two  have  been 
combined  in  one.     Thus  n!)0  hy  unto  death  has  arisen  in  Ps.  xlviii. 

15,  from  ninS^r,  as  it  is  read  in  143  manuscripts,  and  expressed  in  the 

Alexandrine  version  and  in  the  Chaldee  Paraphrase.  On  the  other 
hand,  in  Ps.  Iv.  16.  niD'a''  devastations,  ought  to  be  divided  accord- 
ing to  the  fcVi  into  N"'K^'  or  niD  'a^'  let  death  seize,*  which  is  given  also 

"*  [Or,  according  to  Michaelis,  let  him  constitute  death  their  rigid  creditor ; 
exactorem  constituat  mortem  super  illoB ;  from  the  Arabic  form  i  t  Suppl.  ad 
Heb.  Lex.  No.  1655.     Tr.} 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  159 

m  many  editions,  and  by  the  Alexandrine  translator,  by  Aquila,  Sym- 
machus,  Jerome,  and  the  author  of  the  Peshito  Syriac.  So  also  in 
Hos.  vi.   5,  the  words  NV  11N  yt39tyDl,  and  thy  judgments,  a  light 

goeth  forth  are  more  accurately  divided  by  the  Septuagint,  the  Syriac 
and  the  Chaldee  thus,  NX'  Mk2  'tasa'D?  and  my  judgment  (my  righ- 
teous declaration),  goeth  forth  as  the  light  (the  Sun). 

§  137.  Erroneous  corrections. 

It  has  been  already  remarked  (§  108  and  111),  that  here  and  there 
the  text  has  been  improperly  corrected  to  make  it  conformable  to 
grammatical  analogy,  or  to  the  Masora,  A  reading  therefore  which 
departs  from  grammatical  principles  and  tJie  Masora  is  less  to  be  sus- 
pected of  having  been  altered,  and  consequently  is  more  probable  than 
one  which  agrees  with  them.  Another  source  of  corruption  has  been 
the  disposition  of  transcribers  and  readers  of  manuscripts  to  alter 
any  thing  difficult,  or  of  rare  occurrence,  or  which  was  unknown  or 
unintelligible  to  themselves,  or  seemed  likely  to  give  offence.  On 
this  account  a  reading  which  is  difficult,  of  rare  occurrence,  and  which 
might  give  offence,  is  in  itself  preferable  to  one  which  is  common,  easy, 
and  liable  to  no  exception,  the  very  character  of  which  is  sufficient 
reason  for  suspecting  it  of  having  suffered  alteration  by  some  modern 
hand.  This  rule  is  as  it  were  the  touchstone  of  the  able  and  judi- 
cious critic. 

§  138.     Whether  various  Readings  have  arisen  from  Corruption. 

Although  the  Hebrew  text  has  not  been  corrupted,  yet  corruptions 
may  have  been  attempted,  and  this  may  have  given  rise  at  least  to 
various  readings.  But  such  an  attempt  cannot  be  proved  by  exam- 
ples of  various  readings  produced  from  this  source,  unless  it  be  thought 
proper  to  consider  as  such  the  change  of  D'tnj,  Gerizim  into  hyv  Ebal, 

i 
in  Deut.  xxvii.  4.,  and  of  nii'D,  Moses,  into  nil'  D,  Manasseh  in  Jud. 

xviii.  30.:  in  the  latter  of  which  places  the  transcribers  themselves 


160  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 
have  candidly  intimated  by  the  suspended  Nun  that  riB'D  is  the  genu- 
ine reading,  and  the  Masorets  also  expressly  state,  that  the  Nun  was 
inserted,  in  order  that  the  first  idolatrous  priest  should  not  be  said  to 
be  a  grandson  of  Moses.  But  although  we  have  no  other  instances  of 
readings  originating  in  corruption,  yet  there  is  no  want  of  examples  of 
readings  less  favourable  to  Christians  having  been  preferred  by  tran- 
scribers and  widely  propagated  in  manuscripts,  as  5]''T'Dn  in  Ps.  xvi. 

10.,  nN3  in  Ps.  xxii.  17.,  and  rih'Vf  in  Gen.  xlix.  10.     Wherefore, 

the  reading  which  is  less  orthodox  in  the  Jewish  sense  is  more  probable 
than  the  orthodox,  so  as  to  admit  of  an  exception  against  even  a  majority 
of  witnesses  in  its  favour. 

§  139.     Critical  Argument  from  the  Series  of  Discourse . 

Whatever  may  be  the  result  of  the  depositions  of  witnesses  or  of  in- 
vestigation of  the  question  which  reading  could  most  readily  arise  from 
another,  the  series  of  discourse  must  be  compared.  For  although  the 
truth  of  a  reading  cannot  be  inferred  solely  from  its  agreement  with 
the  context,  because  it  is  possible  that  a  false  reading  may  have  very 
plausible  pretensions  in  this  respect,  yet  a  reading  which  is  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  context  is  certainly  spurious,  fo<r  no  author  of  a  sound  mind 
would  write  words  without  meaning  or  at  variance  with  the  connexion 
of  his  discourse.  Yet  great  circumspection  is  required  that  a  read- 
ing, which  at  first  view  seems  to  be  at  variance  with  the  context  or 
not  to  give  a  suitable  sense,  be  not  immediately  rejected  ;  for  it  may 
be  the  more  difficult  reading,  which,  when  correctly  understood,  ex- 
actly coincides  with  the  context,  and  is  preferable  by  the  rule  just 
stated  (§  137)  on  account  of  its  very  difficulty.  The  context,  it  is  to 
be  remembered,  comprises  not  only  the  connexion  of  those  parts  of 
the  discourse  which  immediately  precede  and  follow  the  passage  in 
question,  but  also  the  syntactical  construction  of  the  sentence.  The 
comparison  of  this  requires  by  far  the  greatest  degree  of  caution. 
On  the  one  hand  no  rule  is  without  its  exception,  and  what  is  sup- 
posed to  be  an  anomaly  may  be  a  legitimate  exception  to  the  rule. 
On  the  other  hand,  admitting  the  existence  of  a  solecism,  it  mav  have 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  161 

originated  even  with  the  author  himself,  provided  it  be  not  too  great 
an  aberration  fi-om  the  genius  of  the  language,  as  that  in  I  Sam.  vi. 

19.,   ti^'N   f]SK   D'tS'Dn   ty'N   DT^tt'- 

§  140.    Critical  Arguments  derived  from  tJie  Poetic  Parallelism. 

In  poems,  the  poetic  parallelism  affords  no  contemptible  aid  in 
a  comparison  of  the  context.  For  as  in  Hebrew  poetry  the  members 
are  either  synonymous  or  antithetic,  or  at  least  conformed  to  each 
other  in  the  order  of  construction,  they  serve  for  mutual  illustration, 
B.nda  reading  which  is  at  variance  vnth  the  parallel  member  is  spurious. 
It  is  not  however  on  the  other  hand  to  be  concluded,  that  a  reading 
which  coincides  with  the  parallel  member  is  necessarily  genuine,  since 
a  spurious  reading,  especially  if  it  have  arisen  fi-om  an  erroneous  judg- 
ment of  transcribers,  may  exhibit  a  perfect  coincidence.  In  alpha- 
betical poems  omissions  of  verses  are  easily  observed,  (See  Ps.  xxv. 
4,  5,  17,  18.  xxxvii,  28,  29.  cxiv.  1^,  14  )  and  even  additions  and 
transpositions  of  words.  So  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  39.  the  addition  of  the  prefix 
Vau  in  n^^iK'm  is  evident,  as  the  verse  ought  to  begin  with  Thau  ;  and 

in  Ps.  xxv.  2.  the  transposition  of  the  words  5|3  Tl^X  for  TISn  ^2  is 

discoverable  from  the  necessity  of  beginning  the  verse  with  Beth. 

§   141.     Argument  from  Parallel  Places. 

As  transcribers  have  often  altered  parallel  places  with  the  view  of 
making  them  correspond,  this  has  given  rise  to  the  rule  of  criticism, 
that  a  reading  which  varies  from  the  parallel  place  is,  ceeteris  paribus, 
more  probable  than  one  which  entirely  agrees  vnth  it.  Still  the  frequent 
disagreement  of  parallel  places  shows  that  the  eagerness  of  transcri  ■ 
bers  to  render  them  conformable  to  each  other  has  not  been  without 
some  limitation,  even  manifest  errors  having  been  occasionally  left 
untouched.  Undoubtedly,  therefore,  faulty  readings  may  be  cor- 
rected from  the  parallel  places.  Thus,  in  II  Chron.  xxii.  2.,  where 
the  son  is  said  to  be  forty-two  years  old,  and  therefore  according  to  II 
Chron.  xxi.  20.,  two  years  older  than  his  father,  the  text  is  without 
doubt  to  be  restored  from  II  Kings  viii.  26.,  so  that  the  age  of  the 

21 


162       CiENERAL  /NTKODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

son  may  be  twenty-two  years :  for  3D,  42,  could  easily  have  arisen 
from  33,  22,  by  a  mistake  of  the  eye.  Comp.  also  II  Sam.  xxi.  19., 
with  I  Chron.  xx.  5.,  where  the  former  is  plainly  to  be  corrected  by 
the  latter.  It  not  unfrequently  happens,  however,  that  such  is  the  state 
of  parallel  places  as  to  make  a  judgment  doubtful. 

If  parallel  places  of  the  same  book  are  at  variance,  one  or  other  is 
no  doubt  erroneous,  and  the  point  to  be  investigated  is,  which  read- 
ing could  the  more  easily  arise  from  the  other.  In  determining  this, 
the  critic  is  often  at  a  loss. — But  if  an  author  refer  to  some  passage  of 
a  book  more  ancient  than  himself,  in  which  there  is  now  a  various 
reading,  he  affords  the  most  ample  testimony  to  the  true  reading  of  that 
passage.  Thus  Ezekiel,  c.  xxi.  32,  (27.,)  is  evidence  that  in  his  time 
the  reading  in   Gen.   xlix.   10.,  was  ribB',    for  he  explains   it  by 

lDSK?r3n  iS  "wa,  whose  right  it  is. 

§  142.     Probability  as  to  what  the  author  has  written. 

When  any  author  has  composed  a  work  in  a  certain  country,  in  a 
particular  place,  at  a  definite  time,  and  with  circumstances  of  a  de- 
terminate kind,  all  these  characteristics  are  impressed  on  his  compo- 
sition, and  may  be  observed  by  nice  attention.  From  this  source 
arises  the  rule  of  criticism,  that  a  reading  which  is  at  variance  tvitk 
/  the  country,  place,  age,  and  circumstances  of  an  author  is  spurious . 
It  is  evident,  therefore,  that  a  knowledge  of  the  history  of  his  author 
is  necessary  for  a  critic. Each  author  has  also  his  peculiar  con- 
formation of  language,  character  of  style,  mode  of  thinking,  range  of 
figures,  and  particular  modification  of  sentiment,  from  all  of  which 
also  must  be  deduced  critical  rules  peculiarly  adapted  to  each  book. 
Thus,  for  example,  in  Job,  Hosea,  Micah,  Joel,  Isaiah,  where  the 
style  of  writing  is  beautiful  and  subUme,  the  elegant  reading  is  the 
more  probable  ;  but  in  Haggai,  Malachi,  Ezra,  and  Nehemiah,  where 
the  composition  is  inferior,  the  contrary  rule  holds  good.  In  Isaiah 
and  Micah  the  reading  which  contains  a  paronomasia  is  to  be  pre- 
ferred ;  in  the  Psalms  of  David,  the  more  agreeable  ;  in  those  of 
Asaph,  and  the  poems  of  Moses,  the  more  sublime.  But  this  is  a 
subject  which  requires  great  discrimination  and  attention,  and  a  re- 
peated perusal  of  the  books. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  163 

§  143.  General  critical  rules. 
A  very  extensive  and  accurate  knowledge  of  very  many  subjects, 
some  of  them  very  minute,  is  necessary  for  a  critic.  A  knowledge 
of  manuscripts,  of  editions,  of  versions,  of  ancient  Jewish  and  Chris- 
tian writings,  of  the  origin  of  various  readings,  of  the  history  of  the 
text  and  versions,  is  particularly  necessary.  The  critic  moreover 
ought  to  be  endowed  with  an  acute  judgment,  a  retentive  memory,  and 
a  keen  attention,  and  should  be  well  read  in  the  writings  of  eminent 
masters  of  the  art.  And  even  if  he  be  well  skilled  in  all  these 
points,  still  he  undertakes  a  subject  full  of  hazard  and  difficulty,  as 
the  many  errors  into  which  the  greatest  men  have  fallen  most  abun- 
dantly evince.  Beginners  in  criticism,  therefore,  should  remember, 
that  in  such  a  subject  the  greatest  caution  must  be  exercised  ;  espe- 
cially with  respect  to  the  sacred  books,  which  have  been  written  out 
with  much  greater  care  than  common  works,  in  relation  to  which  the 
same  caution  is  nevertheless  usually  recommended.  For  this  reason 
some  general  rules  are  added,  which  may  lay  down  in  a  few  words 
the  mode  of  procedure  adopted  by  the  best  critics. 

1)  The  critic,  hke  the  judge,  must  be  unbiassed  by  any  partiality; 
in  other  words,  he  must  be  free  from  any  preconceived  opinion.  It 
is  therefore  his  duty,  not  only  to  be  free  from  any  desire  to  support 
or  to  alter  a  received  reading,  but  also  to  abstain  from  giving  any  de- 
cision previously  to  a  thorough  examination  of  witnesses  and  of  inter- 
nal arguments. 2)  As  the  judge  not  only  hears  and  examines  the 

arguments  of  the  plaintiff,  but  also  those  of  the  accused,  so  must  the 
critic  examine  with  equal  attention,  not  only  the  arguments  alleged 
against  a  received  reading,  but  those  also  which  are  in  its  favour.  In 
doing  this  he  is  to  take  care  not  to  suppose  that  all  the  witnesses  not 
produced  in  favour  of  a  various  reading  are  on  the  side  of  the  re- 
ceived ;  for  it  often  happens  that  many  of  them  have  no  testimony  to 
give,  that  is,  that  the  manuscripts  are  defective  in  that  place,  or  that  it 

is  impossible  to  infer  from  the  versions  what  the  translators  read. 

3)  As  spurious  readings  have  been  very  extensively  propagated  by 
means  of  the  Masora,  or  of  standard  manuscripts  from  which  many 
others  have  been  written  and  corrected,  or  even  on  account  of  their 
being  more  orthodox  ;  not  every  reading  for  which  the  greatest  num- 
ber of  witnesses  depose  is  to  be  considered  as  genuine.     The  true 


164   GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

reading  may  be  preserved  by  a  few,  or  by  even  a  single  one,  as  is  the 
case  with  nDtS^J  W^'iy  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  28.     Witnesses,  therefore,  as  in 

civil  and  criminal  courts,  are  not  only  to  be  numbered  but  also  scruti- 
nized, their  testimony  examined,  what  can  be  oifered  on  the  other 
side  investigated,  and  internal  arguments  also  carefully  considered. 
— — 4)  If  in  all  other  respects  two  readings  are  equal,  (a  case  which 
rarely  occurs,)  the  number  of  witnesses  must  decide  the  question  of 
genuineness,  the  probability  being  the  greater  in  proportion  as  this 
increases.  But  from  the  number  of  witnesses  are  to  be  excluded, 
not  only  all  the  mediate  versions,  but  also  manuscripts  of  the  same 
recension  or  family,  which  ought  to  be  regarded  as  constituting  only 
one.  This,  however,  cannot  take  place  until  the  manuscripts  are  re- 
duced into  families. 5)  If  much  more  ancient  witnesses,  or  supe- 
rior manuscripts,  or  stronger  internal  arguments,  declare  in  favour  of 
one  reading,  all  things  are  by  no  means  equal ;  for  the  more  ancient 
witnesses  are  the  more  weighty,  the  oldest  versions  are  of  greater 
importance  than  manuscripts,  the  more  ancient  or  excellent  manu^ 
scripts  are  preferable  to  the  more  modern  and  inferior,  and  internal 

arguments  very  often  add  great  weight  to  witnesses. 6)  Readings 

which  have  the  unanimous  testimony  of  all  or  almost  all  the  versions, 
manuscripts,  and  editions,  and  are  favoured  also  by  internal  argu- 
ments, are  critically  certain.  Since  this  is  the  case  with  all  the 
readings  of  the  Old  Testament,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  various 
readings,  affecting  the  sense  ;  it  clearly  follows,  that,  as  a  whole,  the 
text  is  critically  certain.  Thus  the  incorruptness  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  is  more  fully  confirmed. 

§  144.     Critical  conjecture. 

Thus  far  I  have  treated  of  the  correction  of  the  text  from  the  tes- 
timony of  the  ancients.  It  remains  to  be  inquired  whether  it  can 
be  allowed  in  any  case  to  correct  the  Hebrew  text,  independently  of 
any  ancient  testimony,  from  internal  arguments  simply,  or  from  criti- 
cal conjecture.  Should  tliis  be  absolutely  forbidden,  it  would  be  ne- 
cessary to  admit,  that  no  genuine  reading  has  perished  under  the 
hands  of  transcribers  during  the  lapse  of  so  many  centuries,  in  the 
five  last  of  which,  indeed,  tbpfe  are  many  manuscript  witnesses  ex- 


OF    THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.  165 

tant,  but  in  the  whole  period  which  intervened  between  the  10th 
century  after  and  the  3d  before  Christ  none  are  to  be  found  except 
some  versions  and  certain  quotations  made  by  writers  of  those  ages, 
and  from  the  latter  date  Up  to  the  authors  themselves  no  witnesses  of 
readings  exist.  But  if  it  is  necessary  to  concede  that  genuine  read- 
ings have  perished,  then  it  must  also  be  acknowledged,  that  it  is  al- 
lowable by  the  aid  of  internal  arguments  or  critical  conjecture,  to 
restore  those  spurious  readings,  at  least,  which  change  the  meaning. 

§   145.      Use  of  critical  conjecture. 

If  criticism  which  conducts  its  operations  on  the  authority  of  wit- 
nesses is  to  be  carefully  and  moderately  exercised,  much  rather  ought 
this  to  be  the  case  when  independently  of  such  authority  it  is  driven 
to  conjecture.  To  seek  after  conjectures  designedly,  or  on  light 
grounds  to  alter  the  reading,  and  introduce  the  alteration  into  the 
text,  is  what  sound  critics  stigmatize  as  a  censurable  eagerness  for 
correcting  ;  and  they  lay  down  the  principle,  that  conjectures  are  not 
to  be  attempted  except  when  necessity  forces,  or  very  great  probabi- 
lity persuades  to  such  a  course,  and  that  even  then  they  are  not  to 
be  introduced  into  the  text,  but  thrown  into  notes. 

Necessity  forces,  when  a  learned  and  skilful  interpreter,  (for  those 
who  are  not  versed  in  the  subject  have  nothing  to  do  with  a  matter  of 
this  importance,)  finds  it  impossible  to  elicit  a  suitable  sense  from  all 
the  reafUngs  of  a  place  which  are  extant,  after  all  other  methods  have 
been  tried ;  or  when  the  sense  is  repugnant  to  undoubted  history 
well  known  to  the  author  of  the  book,  or  to  doctrine  elsewhere  pro- 
posed by  the  same  writer.  And  in  this  case  conjecture  ought  not  to 
be  sought,  but  freely  to  offer  itself  and  to  consist  in  a  slight  altera- 
tion of  a  word  made  in  a  way  similar  to  that  in  which  spurious  read- 
ings arise.     Thus  it  would  seem  that  in  Ps.  cvii.  3.,  D'D  ought  to  be 

changed  into  |''D"'D. 

Probability  is  much  in  favour  of  conjecture  when  a  certain 
reading  gives  a  sense,  tolerable  indeed,  yet  not  in  all  respects  adapted 
to  the  context,  while  a  slight  alteration  corresponding  with  the 
manner  in  which  errors  arise  produces  a  complete  consistency. 
Thus  in  .Tud.  xiv.  14,  16.,  where  it  is  said,  "  thev  could  not  ex- 


166  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

pound  the  riddle  in  three  days,  and  it  came  to  pass  on  the  seventh 
day,  &c.,"  if  r\'Q/^^  or  'j,  three,  be  changed  into  TWVi  or  'i,  «x, 

every  thing  will  be  clear.  If,  however,  the  probability  of  a  reading  be- 
ing erroneous  is  rather  snialL  or  if  the  alteration  of  the  reading  is 
considerable,  or  varies  much  from  the  analogy  by  which  errors  origi- 
nate, the  conjectural  emendation  is  to  be  rejected,  although  it  may 
suggest  itself  Thus  John  David  Michaelis  conjectures  without  suf- 
ficient reason,  that  in  I  Sam.  viii.  16,  for  D3"TiDn  your  asses,  the 

reading  ought  to  be  DO'n-iDn  your  precious  things ;  but  if  a  better 

reading  were  wanted  in  this  place,  it  is  offered  by  the  Alexandrine 
translator,  who  gives  the  meaning  of  DDnpa,  your  oxen. 

That  sort  of  conjecture  which  aims  at  making  the  text  conformable 
to  grammatical  rules  is  to  be  attributed  solely  to  an  unwarrantable 
eagerness  for  correcting. 

§  146.     Doctrinal  conjecture. 

An  alteration  of  a  reading  without  a  witness  an  doctrinal  grounds 
merely,  is  called  doctrinal  conjecture.  This  is  nothing  but  a  cor- 
ruption of  the  text,  and  not  to  be  tolerated  in  any  book.  It  is  suf- 
ficient to  remark  that  such  conjecture  is  founded  not  only  on  strictly 
doctrinal  arguments,  or  such  as  refer  to  articles  of  faith  or  moral  pre- 
cepts, but  also  on  all  others  derived  from  opinions  previously  fixed. 
If,  therefore,  doctrinal  conjecture  induced  the  Jews  to  alter  q^VM  Ge- 

rizim  into  ^y^  Ebal  in  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  in  order  to  deprive  the  Sama- 
ritans of  an  argument  for  that  as  a  place  of  worship  ;  it  was  the  same 
pi-inciple  which  led  the  Samaritans  to  add  in  Exod.  xii.  10.  to  the 
words  <'  the  sojourning  of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt,"  the  clause  "  and 
in  Canaan  ;"  because,  through  a  preconceived  opinion  they  conjec- 
tured that  430  years  would  not  agree  with  four  generations. — The 
critic  must  also  be  on  his  guard,  not  to  be  induced  by  doctrinal  argu- 
ments to  ascribe  the  more  weight  to  witnesses  or  to  internal  argu- 
ments, because  the  reading  for  which  they  give  evidence  is  favourable 
to  certain  opinions. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  167 

§  147.  ''Higher  Criticism. 
Higher  criticism,  (which  indeed  often  rises  to  an  extreme)  does 
not  differ  from  conjectural,  except  that  it  is  not  occupied  with  single 
words  or  phrases,  but  with  sentences  and  parts  of  sentences  of  some 
length,  and  also  with  whole  books  which  are  proved  from  internal 
arguments  either  to  belong  or  not  to  belong  to  a  certain  age  or  writer. 
In  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  respecting  the  history  of  which 
we  have  so  little  external  evidence,  this  kind  of  criticism  is  absolutely 
necessary,  and  by  the  aid  of  it  much  is  discovered  which  borders  on 
historical  certainty.  But,  like  critical  conjecture,  it  ought  to  be 
exercised  with  sobriety  and  modesty.  No  reliance  is  to  be  placed 
upon  what  might  possibly  be  or  happen,  for  to  reason  from  what  is 
possible  to  what  is  real  is  illogical  ;  nor  are  bold  decisions  to  be 
made  on  light  grounds  affording  nothing  more  than  some  weak  pro- 
bability, which,  upon  a  more  attentive  examination  of  the  subject, 
comes  to  nothing.  The  errors  which  have  been  committed  in  identi- 
fying authors  of  our  own  age  who  have  written  anonymously  in  their 
vernacular  tongue  with  others,  whose  style,  principles,  mode  of  rea- 
soning, and  course  of  thought,  were  all  well  known  from  other 
sources,*  ought  to  be  a  remarkable  warning  to  the  bolder  critics  of 
the  present  day,  to  employ  this  uncertain  criticism  with  more  cau- 
tion, and  to  imitate  more  closely  the  example  of  the  Scaligers  and 
Casaubons.  Suspicions  and  trifling  reasons  prove  nothing.  It  must 
be  shown  that  a  book  or  a  part  of  a  book  contains  things  manifestly 
more  modern  than  its  date,  or  such  as  could  not  have  been  written  by 
the  author  to  whom  it  is  ascribed,  on  account  of  the  age  in  which  he 
lived,  or  the  sects  to  which  he  belonged,  or  the  language  which  he 
used,  which  must  be  clearly  and  perfectly  known  to  us.  [a] — Lastly, 
caution  must  be  used,  never  to  call  in  the  aid  of  doctrinal  arguments 
drawn  from  any  preconceived  opinions. 

[a]  Jahn  quotes  in  his  German  work,  the  following  passage  from 
MoRus,  Opusc.  P.  II.  p.  46.  s.,  whence  the  preceding  ideas  are  taken,  and 
■which  richly  merits  insertion  here  in  full.     "  Ne  monumenta  historiae 

*  [The  author  alludes  to  some  anonymous  publications  in  Germany,  which  were  er- 
roneously ascribed  to  Zimmerman  and  Kant,  and  the  caution  which  he  founds  upon 
this  fact  was  never  more  applicable  than  it  is  to  bis  countrymen  at  the  present  day. 


168  GENERAL  INTRODUCTION  TO  THE  SACRED  BOOKS 

festinantius  suspecta  judicemus,  quasi  haec  allior  indago  critica  sit,  si 
ubique  suboleat  aliquid  suspecti.  Suspectum  nihil  in  hoc  genere  dici 
potest,  nisi  vel  per  indubitata  et  diserla  testimonia  doceri  potest,  non  esse 
illo  tempore  scriptum,  sed  per  fraudem  confictum ;  vel  non  potuit  illo 
tempore  scribi ;  quia  insunt  res  illo  tempore  recenliores ;  vel  ab  eo  viro 
scribi  non  potuit  propter  tempus,  quo  vixit,  propter  disciplinam  guam 
secutus  est,  et  propter  orationem,  qua  usus  est,  plane  per/ecte  nobis  cogni- 
iam ;  vel  monumenta  vetusta  invicem  dissonant,  et  injiciunt  suo  dissensu 
serupulum.  Ad  hos  leges  nisi  redeatur,  et  Scaligerorum  et  Casaubono- 
rum  exemplum  severius  in  imitationem  trahatur,  verendum  est,  ne, 
quod  apud  Aristophanem  Euripides  conqueri  cogitur,  avdpwKS,  oX»)v  Tv^v 
-rpaywSjav  fj.s  acpaipstg,  idem  mutatis  verbis  majore  jure  magna  vete- 
rum  historise  scriptorum  pars  indignari  debeat ;  oXtjv  <rv\\/  ig'opiav  ^|xwu 
a(paip£iTe."     TV.f 


op    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  I  (59 


PART  II. 


PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK   OF  THE 
OLD    TESTAMENT 


§  1 .     Order  of  treatment. 

Having  discussed  those  subjects  which  relate  equally  to  all  the 
books  of  the  Old  Testament,  we  proceed  to  the  examination  of  the 
particular  books.  These  we  shall  not  take  up  in  the  order  in 
which  they  are  arranged  in  manuscripts  or  editions,  but  in  noticing 
them  shall  follow,  as  much  as  possible,  the  order  of  the  times"  in 
which  they  were  respectively  written,  or  of  which  they  contain  the 
history.  We  will  commence  with  the  historical  books,  proceeding 
in  succession  to  the  prophetical,  to  the  Hagiographa,  and,  in  the  last 
place,  to  the  deuterocanonical.  In  this  manner  the  examination  of 
the  \yhole  will  occupy  four  sections. 


22 


170  PARTICULAR  IiNTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 


SECTION  I. 


OF  THE  HISTORICAL   BOOKS    OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT- 


CHAPTER  I. 


OP   THE    PENTATEUCH. 


^  §  2.     Contents  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  Pentateuch  contains  an  account  of  the  arrangements  of  the 
Divine  Being  for  the  purpose  of  founding,  estabhshing,  maintaining, 
and  promoting,  rehgion  and  good  morals,  from  the  creation  of  man 
down  to  the  death  of  Moses.  By  far  the  greater  part  relates  to 
those  things  which  God  established  by  the  agency  of  Moses.  What 
precedes  this  is  introductory,  but  necessary  for  the  correct  and  per- 
fect understanding  of  the  remainder.  The  work  consists  at  present 
of  five  books,*  but  the  contents  naturally  divide  themselves  into 
three  parts. 

I.  The  First,  containing  the  book  of  Genesis,  comprises  the  di- 
vine arrangements  for  the  support  of  religion  and  virtue  antecedently 
to  the  Mosaic  dispensation,  from  the  creation  of  man  down  to  the 
death  of  Joseph,  A.  M.  2318.  This  may  be  subdivided  into  two 
portions  :  tJie  first,  Gen.  i.  1 — xi.  26,  contains  in  a  few  documents, 
the  principal  events  from  the  creation  to  the  birth  of  Abraham, 
A.  M.  1948,  and  recounts  the  ancestors  of  that  patriarch  who  had 
cultivated  and  preserved  a  due  regard  for  rehgion  and  good  morals  : 
the  second,  Gen.  xi.  27 — 1.  26,  furnishes  a  more  detailed  history  of 

*  [See  $  22,  note  b.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  171 

Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  continuing  to  the  cleath  of  Joseph,  com- 
prising in  the  whole  a  period  of  295  years  ;  in  this  part  the  promises 
given  to  the  Patriarchs  form  every  where  the  most  conspicuous 
object,  [a] 

II.  The  Second  division,  containing  the  books  of  Exodus,  Leviti- 
cus, and  Numbers,  gives  the  history  of  Moses  and  of  his  legislation, 
and  shows  how  the  promises  made  to  the  Patriarchs  were  fulfilled  by 
corresponding  events  ;  namely,  the  increase  of  their  posterity,  their 
deliverance  from  Egypt,  and  the  establishment  among  them,  by  the 
agency  of  Moses,  of  a  theocratical  government  and  administration, 
by  means  of  which  true  religion  should  be  preserved  until  the  time 
when,  as  had  been  promised  to  the  Patriarchs,  it  should  be  propaga- 
ted by  their  posterity  among  all  nations,  or,  according  to  the  expres- 
sion of  the  promises  themselves,  when  all  nations  should  be  hhsscd. 
Many  events  of  the  first  two  years  are  related,  but  much  fewer,  and 
only  the  more  important,  of  the  following  thirty-seven,  in  Num.  xv — 
xix.,  and  of  the  fortieth,  in  Num.  xx — xxxvi. 

III.  In  Deuteronomy,  which  constitutes  the  Third  division,  the 
Hebrews  are  admonished  to  keep  the  Law  :  some  laws  are  repeated 
and  more  accurately  defined,  some  are  altered,  and  some  are  added  ; 
and  the  good  effects  which  should  attend  the  punctual  observance  of 
the  whole,  and  the  evils  which  should  follow  its  neglect,  are  laid  be- 
fore the  Hebrews.  After  this  the  renewal  of  the  Covenant  between 
the  people  and  God  their  king  is  described,  and  a  prophetical  poem 
concerning  the  future  condition  of  the  nation,  to  be  committed  to 
memory  by  the  Hebrews,  is  added.  All  these  things  have  reference 
to  the  inhabiting  of  Canaan,  possession  of  which  was  very  soon  to  be 
taken.  Lastly,  Moses  publicly  delivers  his  book  to  the  priests  and 
princes  of  the  people,  to  be  kept  in  the  tabernacle,  in  the  most  holy 
place,  beside  the  ark,  and  to  be  read  to  the  people  during  the  feast 

of  tabernacles,   every  seventh  year. The  blessing  of  the  tribes 

and  the  death  of  Moses,  Deut.  xxxiii.  xxxiv.,  have  been  added  by 
another  hand,  as  is  clearly  proved  by  the  difference  of  language 
and  style. 

[I.  Contents  of  Genesis,  c.  i.  1 — xi.  26.  After  an  account  of  the 
creation,  of  the  original  state  of  man,  and  of  the  fall,  this  portion 
gradually  proceeds  to  relate  the  increase  of  irreligion  and  immoraUty 


172  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH   BOOK 

until  about  the  year  235,  (iv.  26.  v.  3,  6.)  :  the  true  worshippei-s 
ibund  it  necessary  to  distinguish  themselves  by  the  appellation  '  sons 
of  God,'  while  those  who  disregarded  the  divine  instructions  and 
were  led  by.mere  human  propensities  were  called  '  children  of  men.^ 
Of  the  former  class  were  the  ancestors  of  Noah,  who  are  conse- 
quently here  introduced,  (c.  v.)  although  the  genealogy,  like  a  long 
parenthesis,  interrupts  the  close  connexion  between  iv.  26,  and  vi.  1. 
For  the  same  cause  the  extraordinary  piety  of  Enoch  and  his  pre- 
mature and  very  remarkable  end  are  mentioned,  (v.  22.  ss.)  The 
intermarriages  of  these  two  classes  of  people  produced  at  last  a  cor- 
ruption of  religion  and  morals  so  general,  that  God  by  a  flood  de- 
stroyed all  living  creatures  except  Noah  and  his  family  and  the  ani- 
mals which  were  preserved  along  with  them  in  the  ark.  On  account 
of  the  magnitude  of  tliis  terrible  event,  it  is  related  with  more  than 
usual  particularity,  (vi.  9 — ix.  29.)  This  is  followed  by  a  genealo- 
gical and  geographical  account  of  settlements  made  in  the  world, 
(c.  X.)  and  then  (xi.  1 — 9,)  the  attempt  to  build  the  tower  of  Babel 
is  related,  which,  as  it  gave  rise  to  the  dispersion,  is  closely  con- 
nected with  that  account.  The  posterity  of  Shem,  vfiih  whom  reli- 
gion and  morals  were  preserved  longest  and  in  the  greatest  purity, 
are  then  introduced  (xi.  26.)  down  to  the  birth  of  Abraham. 

The  remainder  of  Genesis  contains  a  more  particular  account  of 
facts  in  which  the  Israehtes  were  interested.  As  the  family  of  Terah 
were  idolatrous  (Josh.  xxiv.  2.  Gen.  xxxi.  30.  xxxv.  2.),  Abraham  is 
called  to  go  to  Canaan,  where  a  numerous  posterity  is  promised  him, 
and  the  settlement  of  his  descendants  through  Isaac,  after  a  residence 
of  400  years  in  a  foreign  land,  and  also  that  in  his  seed  all  nations 
should  be  blessed  (xii.  2.  s.  xviii.  17.  ss.  xxii.  17.  s.  and  xv.  13 — 16.)  ^ 
all  which  has  in  view  the  preservation  of  the  knowledge  of  God  and 
true  religion,  as  is  plain  from  xviii.  16 — 22.  xvii.  4 — 14.  Comp. 
Archaeol.  Germ.  11.  Th.  II.  B.  §  163.  S.  214.  ff.  These  promises, 
which  are  repeated  to  Isaac  (xxvi.  1 — 5.)  and  to  Jacob  (xxviii.  13.  s.), 
are  the  principal  point  on  which  every  thing  in  this  domestic  history 
turns,  the  account  of  the  adventures  of  Joseph  not  excepted,  as  this 
includes  the  descent  of  Jacob's  family  into  Egypt,  where  they  became 
numerous.  Whatever  is  introduced  in  relation  to  other  families  and 
peoples  has  some  bearing  on  the  histoi7  of  these  patriarchs,  as  xiv. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  173 

18.  s.,  or  concerns  some  collateral  branches,  as  xxv.  1 — 4,  12 — 18. 
XXX  vi. 

II.  After  the  account  of  the  miraculous  plagues  of  Egypt,  [6]  this 
part  relates  the  passage  of  the  HieropoJitan  branch  of  the  Red  sea, 
the  ruin  of  the  Egyptian  army,  and  the  journey  of  the  Hebrews 
through  the  deserts  of  Shur,  Sin,  and  Rephidim  to  mount  Horeb,  on 
which  the  peak  of  Sinai  raises  itself,  and  where  Moses  had  received 
his  divine  commission  (Ex.  i — xviii.).  On  this  march  the  bitter  water 
of  Marah  is  rendered  potable  (xv.  23.  ss.)^  manna  and  quails  are 
sent  in  the  desert  of  Sin  (xvi.),  in  Rephidim  Moses  brings  water  from 
a  rock  (xvii.),  the  Amalekites  are  conquered,  and  judges  are  appointed 
by  the  advice  of  Jethro  (xviii.).  In  the  desert  of  Sinai  the  Hebrews 
'receive  Jehovah  as  their  king  (xix.),  who  announces  amidst  thunder 
and  hghtning,  the  fundamental  laws  of  religion  and,  of  the  state  (xx.)  : 
these,  after  they  have  been  more  fully  developed  and  reduced  to  wri- 
ting (xxi — xxiii.),  are  acceded  to  by  the  people  in  a  solemn  covenant 
(xxiv.).  Then  follow  (xxv — xxxi.)  the  directions  for  rearing  the  holy 
tabernacle,  for  the  garments  and  consecration  of  the  priests-  and  for 
whatever  relates  to  the  sanctuary,  with  a  renewed  injunction  to  sanc- 
tify the  Sabbath.  The  two  stone  tablets  which  Moses  brought  from 
the  mountain  are  also  mentioned.  The  history  of  the  golden  calf 
succeeds  (xxxii.  xxxiii.)  ;  also  the  account  of  the  new  tablets,  the  i-e- 
petition  of  some  laws,  and  a  remarkable  appearance  of  God  (xxxiv.). 
The  Sabbatical  injunction  is  again  announced  to  the  people,  and  the 
tabernacle  with  whatever  belonged  to  it  is  set  up  (xxxv — xl.). 

Leviticus  begins  with  directions  for  the  offerings  which  were  to  be 
made  in  the  tabernacle  (i — vii.)  ;  it  relates  the  consecration  of  the 
priests,  and  the  death  of  Aaron's  two  sons  (viii — x.),  and  gives  direc- 
tions about  unclean  beasts,  men,  houses,  and  garments  (xi — xv.). 
Then  follow  (xvi— xxv.)  various  laws,  without  methodical  arrange- 
ment, and  promises  and  threats  form  the  conclusion  (xxvi.).  The 
ordinances  respecting  vows  (xxvii.)  seem  to  have  no  connexion  with 
what  precedes,  and  relate  to  voluntary  obhgations  originating  in  ex- 
traordinary zeal.  f 

The  book  of  Numbers  opens  with  an  account  of  the  preparations 
for  the  decampment  (i — x.).  Those  who  are  fit  for  warhke  duty  are 
numbered  and  described  :  then  follow  the  arrangement  of  the  camp 


174    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

and  the  order  of  march  ;  certain  laws  are  again  introduced  (v.  vi.  ix.), 
also  the  consecration  of  the  Levites,  and  the  age  at  which  their  ser- 
vices began  and  terminated  (viii.),  and  the  presents  offered  by  the 
princes  (vii.). 

At  last,  in  the  second  year  after  the  exode,  in  the  20th  of  the 
second  month,  they  begin  their  march  from  Sinai,  and  proceed  a  dis- 
tance of  three  days'  journey  (x.  11 — 36.).  Some  troubles  and  insur- 
rections arise.  Then  a  part  of  the  camp  is  consumed  by  fire  ;  a 
council  is  appointed  ;  and  Miriam  is  struck  with  leprosy  (xi.  xii.). 
Twelve  spies  are  sent  into  Canaan  whose  report  occasions  a  revolt, 
and  this  leads  to  the  threat  of  God,  that  all  that  race  should  die  in  the 
desert  except  Caleb  and  Joshua  (xiii.  xiv.). 

'  Of  the  remaining  thirty-eight  years  of  the  march  nothing  is  related, 
except  some  laws  concerning  offerings,  the  punishment  of  the  Sabbath 
breaker,  the  revolt  of  Korah,  Dathan,  and  Abiram,  the  miraculous 
establishment  of  the  priesthood  in  the  family  of  Aaron,  directions  for 
the  priests,  and  the  institution  of  the  purification  of  the  unclean  by 
the  ashes  of  the  red  heifer  (xv — xix.). 

In  the  first  month  of  the  fortieth  year,  the  next  generation  of 
the  Hebrews  come  to  the  desert  of  Sin,  in  order  to  penetrate  into 
Canaan  (xx.).  Here  they  receive  water  from  a  rock  smitten  by 
Moses,  and  both  he  and  Aaron  are  excluded  from  the  land  of  promise. 
The  refusal  of  the  king  of  Edom  to  allow  them  to  march  through  his 
country  obliges  them  to  take  a  circuitous  route  (xx.).  Their  discon- 
tent brings  on  the  plague  of  serpents,  which  is  cured  by  looking  at 
one  made  of  brass  and  elevated.  Hence  they  march  to  the  eastern 
side  of  Canaan,  where  they  conquer  Sihon  and  Og,  and  take  pos- 
session of  all  the  country  on  that  side  of  Jordan  (xxi.). 

This  is  followed  by  the  history  of  Balaam  (xxii — xxiv.),  the  relation 
of  the  death  of  24000  Hebrews  on  account  of  the  idolatry  into  which 
they  had  been  enticed  by  the  Moabites  and  Midianites,  and  the  deter- 
mmation  to  engage  in  a  war  with  the  latter  (xxv.).  Then  a  second 
numbering  takes  place  (xxvi.),  various  laws  are  introduced  (xxvii — 
xxx.),  and  the  war  with  the  Midianites  is  undertaken  (xxxi.).  After 
tliis  Reuben,  Gad,  and  the  half  tribe  of  Manasseh,  are  put  in  posses- 
sion of  the  territory  east  of  the  Jordan,  on  the  condition  of  assisting 
the  other  tribes  in  the  conquest  of  Canaan  (xxxii.).     An  enumera- 


OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  175 

tion  of  all  the  encampments  in  the  whole  march  from  Egypt  is  then 
given  (xxxiii.  1 — 49.),  and  certain  laws  which  circumstances  made 
necessary  form  the  conclusion  of  the  book  (xxxiii.  50 — xxxvi.  13.), 

III.  The  third  great  division  of  the  Pentateuch  was  recited  to  the 
people.  The  first  three  portions  can  easily  be  distinguished  by  the 
beginnings  and  endings,  thus  :  the  first,  Deut.  i.  1 — iv.  43  ;  the  second, 
iv.  44 — viii.  20  ;  and  the  third,  ix.  1 — xi.  32.  The  miracles  which 
God  had  wrought  for  the  Hebrews,  the  beneficial  ordinances  which 
he  had  instituted  among  them,  and  the  victories  which  he  had  granted 
them,  are  exhibited  as  motives  to  obedience.  Then  follow  laws  which, 
in  reference  to  a  residence  in  Canaan,  are  in  part  repeated,  and  made 
more  definite,  and  in  part  now  first  announced  (xii.  1 — xxvi.  19.). 
Chap,  xxvii.  takes  up  the  same  subject  which  had  been  touched  on 
before  (xi.  26 — 30.),  the  engraving  of  the  law  (meaning  a  part  of  it) 
on  a  pillar,  and  the  declaration  of  blessings  and  curses.  Then  the 
good  which  should  result  from  obedience,  and  the  evil  which  should 
be  the  consequence  of  disobedience,  are  set  in  opposition  to  each 
other  (xxviii.),  and  (xxix.  xxx.)  the  body  of  the  people  are  admo- 
nished to  obey  the  law,  both  by  a  developement  of  their  future  condition, 
and  by  a  representation  of  the  miracles  which  God  had  already 
wrought  for  them,  and  of  the  benefits  which  he  had  bestowed  on  them, 

Moses  now  lays  down  his  commission,  and  gives  the  book  of  the 
law  to  the  priests,  charging  them  to  deposit  it  in  the  tabernacle  beside 
the  ark,  and  to  read  it  publicly  every  seventh  year  at  the  feast  of  taber- 
nacles. He  appoints  Joshua  to  direct  the  conquest  of  Canaan  (xxxi.), 
and  gives  to  the  people  a  poem  (xxxii.)  to  be  committed  to  memory 
for  their  perpetual  admonition.  At  last  he  takes  a  view  of  Canaan 
from  Nebo,  the  summit  of  Mount  Abarim,  and  then  dies.  His  bless- 
ing of  the  tribes  (xxxiii.)  and  his  death  (xxxiv.)  are  added  by 
another  hand.] 

[a)  The  connexion  of  this  first  division  with  the  two  others,  as  intro- 
ductory to  their  contents,  and  in  some  measure  serving  as  an  explanation 
and  defence  of  the  proceedings  which  they  relate,  will  be  evident  upon 
an  inspection  of  the  following  passages :  ii.  3.  ix.  1 — 17,  20 — 27.  xii.  1 — 3. 
xiii.  14 — 17.  XV.  xvii.  xix.  30 — 38.  xxi.  1 — 20  xxiii.  xxiv.  2 — 8.  xxv. 
1 — 6,  19 — 34.  xxvii.  xxviii.  xxxv.  9 — 15.  xxxvi.  6.  xlvi.  1 — 7.  xlviii. 
xlix.  1.  7 — 13.  See  also  Roseivbitteller,  Proleg.  in  Gen.  5  I.  Schol.  in 
V.  T.  Vol.  I.  p.  41.  s.  Edit.  tert.  1821.     Tr.'] 


176    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[6)  On  the  circumstances  of  these  plagues,  and  the  internal  evidence 
for  the  genuineness  of  the  book  of  Exodus  which  they  afford,  see 
Bryant's  elaborate  Dissertation  on  the  Plagues  of  Egypt,  8vo.  London, 
1810,  or  the  brief  extract  of  his  argument  in  Horne's  Introd.  Vol.  IV. 
pp.  11.  ss.  ed.  2d.     TV.] 

§  3.     Internal  evidence  that  Moses  is  the  author. 

The  genius  and  disposition,  in  other  words,  the  character  of  the 
author  ;  the  contents  of  the  books  themselves,  or  what  they  treat  Of 
in  relation  to  historical,  political,  and  geographical  topics  ;  the  nature 
of  the  style  and  language ;  and  the  arrangement  and  form  of  these 
books,  all  show  that  Moses  was  the  author. 

I.  In  Deuteronomy  the  speaker  is  evidently  an  old  man  whose  age 
has  rendered  him  somewhat  verbose,  captious,  and  querulous,  and 
disposed  to  censure  the  errors  of  his  juniors. 1)  His  manner  of  ad- 
dress is  such  as  might  be  expected  from  one  who  had,  with  the  inter- 
vention of  many  and  great  miracles,  led  the  people  out  of  Egypt ; — 
had,  at  the  foot  of  Sinai,  established  a  theocracy  among  them ; — had 
furnished  them  with  laws  ; — had  governed  them  forty  years,  during 
their  journey  through  Arabia  to  the  Jordan  ; — had  procured  for  them 
many  extraordinary  benefits  ; — and  had,  when  necessary,  chastised 

them  with  signal  punishments. 2)  He  addresses  himself  as  to  a 

people  that  had  seen  and  experienced  all  this,  to  which  he  frequently 

appeals,  by  saying,  '  as  ye  have  seen,''  '  as  ye  have  experienced.'' 3) 

He  speaks  with  the  affection  and  solicitude  of  an  old  man  soon  to 
die,  and  with  a  freedom,  boldness,  and  vehemence  which  none  could 
have  used  but  one  who  had  done  so  much  for  the  people  whom  he 
addressed,  and  one  who  was  anxiously  soUcitous  for  its  future  wel- 
fare. In  fine  he  who  speaks  in  Deuteronomy  enters  so  thoroughly 
into  the  circumstances  and  feehngs  which  must  have  been  peculiar  to 
Moses,  and  what  he  utters  corresponds  so  exactly  to  the  peculiar 
circumstances  of  the  people  addressed,  that  no  other  but  the  original 
speaker  could  ever  have  had  so  perfect  a  regard  to  these  circumstan- 
ces, or  could  ever  have  preserved  it  so  completely  as  nowhere  to 
betray  himself.  They  who  impugn  tliis  argument,  or  consider  it  a? 
of  little  moment,  must  produce  some  ancient  writing  similar  to  this, 
which  is  thoroughly  imbued  with  the  spirit,  nature,  age,  and  peculiar 
circumstances  of  some  person  other  than  the  author,  and  of  the  per- 


Ob'    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  177 

sons  who  are  supposed  to  have  been  the  first  readers  of  tlie  work, 

before  any  weight  can  be  allowed  to  their  objections.- In  the  book 

of  Deuteronomy,  not  only  the  s^uhjects  of  Numbers,  Leviticus,  and 
Exodus,  but  also  the  existence  of  those  books,  are  taken  for  granted  : 
for  the  person  who  speaks  in  Deuteronomy,  and  who,  as  we  have 
seen,  must  have  written  the  book,  must  necessarihj  have  written  these 
three  otlier  books,  since  he  frequently  refers  to  their  contents  ; — 
urges  obedience  to  the  laws  which  are  contained  in  them  ^  and  draws 
from  the  events  which  they  narrate  reasons  for  obeying  those  laws : — 
since,  in  a  word,  without  them  Deuteronomy  would  have  been  unin- 
telligible to  its  readers. In  like  manner  these  four  books  refer  to 

Genesis  as  a  previously  written  composition. 

II.  The  Pentateuch  contains  very  many  accounts  of  the  history, 
religion,  politics,  and  geography  of  remote  ages  and  of  different 
countries  and  nations,  especially  those  of  Egypt  and  Arabia,  as  well 
as  many  passing  allusions  to  these  particulars  :  all  of  these,  as  far  as 
the  paucity  of  documents  relating  to  those  ancient  periods  leaves  us 
quahfied  to  judge,  correspond  exactly  with  those  times,  countries, 
and  nations.  To  these  may  be  added  many  particulars  respecting 
natural  history,  diseases,  the  arts,  military  affairs,  &lc.  The  author, 
therefore,  must  have  been  a  man  carefully  educated  from  his  youth, 
of  a  well  cultivated  mind,  of  very  general  information,  endowed  with 
good  natural  talents,  and  born  at  a  remote  period  : — in  a  word,  such 
a  man  as  wa^  Moses,  educated  in  the  royal  court  of  Egypt,  and  fitted 
for  the  government  of  a  numerous  and  headstrong  people  during  a 
forty  years'  journey  through  the  trackless  deserts  of  Arabia.  In  no 
person  of  a  more  recent  age  could  such  a  variety  of  circumstances 
have  met,  and  none  could  have  acquired  such  a  thorough  knowledge 
of  these  various  subjects  as  entirely  to  avoid  error,  and  never  to  in- 
troduce matters  inappropriate  to  the  countries,  nations,  or  times  in 
question,  or  of  a  more  modern  date,  or  foreign  to  the  subject. 

III.  The  language  of  the  Pentateuch  is  very  ancient  Hebrew,  and 
differs  considerably  from  that  of  the  Psalms  and  other  more  modern 
books.  There  are  no  foreign  words  to  be  found  in  the  Pentateuch, 
except  some  of  old  Egyptian  origin,  such  as  -ix',  •\'\'2^,  nnn,  D'Di3*)n, 

T3£5j.'fe^,  niiJBiJ::,  inx,  Oin,  &c. :  archaisms  occur,  such  as  the  use  of 


J 78  FAKTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

x^in  and  lyj  as  feminines  ;*  verbs  ending  in  n  and  k  are  frequently 

interchanged  ;  the  use  of  the  local  n  is  very  common :  it  contains 
many  flexions  of  verbs  ending  in  x  by  increments  at  the  end  with 
the  omission  of  the  n  ;  also  flexions  of  verbs  in  the  future  in  the 
feminine  plural  without  n  at  the  end  ;t  and  other  similar  forms,  all 
of  which  are  much  less  frequent  in  the  more  modern  books.^  Other 
grammatical  archaisms  have,  no  doubt,  been  corrected  in  a  later  age, 
just  as  X!in  and  ij?i  have  been  pronounced  and  pointed  Nin  and  l^rj. 

Many  words  and  phrases  occur  in  the  Pentateuch  which  are  pecuhar 
to  it,  and  many  peculiar  to  later  books  are  never  found  in  it ;  many 
also  which  are  common  in  the  Pentateuch,  are  elsewhere  of  rare  oc- 
currence, and  the  contrary.  Of  the  different  sorts  of  such  words 
and  phrases  I  have  collected  more  than  a  hundred,§  without  reckon- 
ing a^al  Xsyo|x£va  and  such  as  refer  to  objects  which  there  has  been 
no  occasion  to  mention  elsewhere.  To  enumerate  all,  would  exceed 
the  limits  of  this  work  ;  it  may  not,  however,  be  improper  to  mention 
a  few.     The  following  are  pecuhar  to  the  Pentateuch  :  not  for  13?, 

Snh  for  nbNn,  pON,  f^nj?,  n^Tin  for  which  we  read  elsewhere  aJS'-nn, 

mj  vhs,  and  nj  ^''San,  pnaty  naa^,  ms,  tymn  for  which  we  read 

elsewhere  hlo,  nirT'S  ty'x,  :33p,  r]23t,  DD3,  oiO,  WW,  jX2fn  m"Vi#, 

*  [Xin  is  used  as  a  feminine  almost  two  hundred  times  in  the  Pentateuch.  The 
use  of  this  word  and  "^pi  as  feminines  is  acknowledged  to  he  an  archaism  even  by 
those  who  deny  the  authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch:  e.  g.  V ater.  Comm.  ueber  d. 
Pent.  S.  616.  Gesenius  Gesch.  der  Heb.  Sprache  und'Schrift,  S.  31.  :  Rosen. 
Prolegomena  in  Pent.  p.  30.     Tr.] 

t  [These,  and  all  the  other  peculiar  forms  of  the  Pentateuch,  are  fully  treated  of  in 
a  posthumous  dissertation  of  Jahn's,  entitled  Beitraege  zur  Vertheidigung  der  Aecht- 
heit  des  Pentateuchs,  published  in  the  Archiv  fuer  die  Theologie  und  ihre  neueste  Lite- 
ratur,  herausgeg.  von  E.  G.  Bengel,  Th.  II.  {Tubing.  1818.)  Part  3.  Rosen,  ubi 
sup.  p.  31.     Tr.] 

i  [For  instance,  the  peculiar  inflexions  of  the  future,  so  common  in  the  Pentateuch, 
occur  only  seven  times  iu  all  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament.  Rosen,  ubi 
sup.  p.  31.     Tr.] 

SS  [In  his  subsequent  researches  he  extended  the  number  to  more  than  two  hundred, 
all  of  which  are  given  in  his  Beitraege  u.  s.  f.  ubi  sup.  S.  585 — 630.  See  ako  for  a 
list  of  words  common  in  later  writings,  but  never  or  rarely  found  in  the  Pentateuch. 
Beitraege  u.  s.  f.  ubi  sup.  S.  168—202.     Rosen,  ubi  sup.    Tr.] 


OF   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.  179 

ni3N  iT2,  D'3'7Kn,  MW,  &c.*  The  following  never  occur  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch :  iDp,  V'J,  San,  h2,  niK3x  r\Sr\\  mxay  tiSk,  na^x,  ">m,  'yap, 
h')n,  nbiN,  D^p,  •^B'a,  nnx,  xm,  r\'iu;Ti,  pa,  nSo,  nin,  onn,  pon,  dS;?, 
tS;;,  ^S:ir,  ^'in  used  of  the  praises  of  God,  nVii'?,  T'DH,  Dnn,  ny  and 
n;>  for  eternity,  &c. 

IV.  The  style  of  this  work  is  in  the  poetical  parts  elegant  and  sub- 
lime, in  the  prose  perspicuous,  and  better  than  that  of  any  other  He- 
brew book,  such,  in  short,  as  might  be  expected  from  one  brought  up 
in  a  palace,  and  possessing  a  cultivated  genius.  Yet  it  is  by  no  means 
everywhere  alike,  being  in  Deuteronomy  much  more  verbose,  and  in 
(he  exhortations  more  vehement  and  oratorical ;  all  which  is  natural 
to  an  old  age  of  activity  and  solicitude  respecting  the  condition  of  pos- 
terity. The  order  of  discourse  is  not  everywhere  the  most  conve- 
nient, but  sometimes  unnatural ;  it  frequently  runs  on  in  broken  and 
unconnected  fragments,  many  of  which  are  wound  up  with  distinct 
conclusions.  All  this  shows  a  writer  distracted  by  a  multiplicity  of 
business  ;  writing  not  continuously,  but  with  frequent  interruptions, 
and  in  the  constant  anticipation  of  interruption,  and  for  this  reason 
terminating  parts  of  his  work  with  special  conclusions.  It  shows  a 
writer  who  had  been  many  years  occupied  in  his  work,  and  who, 
during  their  course  had  somewhat  changed  his  style  and  language  :  a 
writer  who,  perhaps,  has  dictated,  as  was  frequently  the  custom, 
some  parts  of  his  works  to  an  amanuensis,  which  would  in  some 
measure  vary  the  style  ;  or  who  has  incorporated  into  his  own  work 
certain  public  records  written  by  the  proper  officers.  Such  is  exactly 
the  style  that  might  be  expected  from  Moses,  who,  while  burdened 
with  so  many  duties,  often  interrupted,  distracted  by  frequent  journeys 

*  [To  these  may  be  added  :  Vrs^'Ss^  ^DKJ,  for  to  die,  for  which  the  later  books 
have  either  rni^K'^yX  f]DN],  (Jud.  ii.  10.  II  Chr.  xjsxiv.  28.)  or  "Sx  t^DXJ 
rnnap  (II  Ki.  xxU.  20.  11  Chr.  xxxiv.  28.)  :  nn;?  rhl,  de  coltu  ;  the  phrase 
occurring  only  in  another  sense,  Ezek.  xvi.  36.  s. :  TMI  occurs  only  Gen.  xlviii.  16. 
and  T3T  only  Gen.  xxx.  20.    Rosen,  nbf  sup.  p.  32.     Tr,] 


iJiO         PARTICULAR    LNTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

from  place  to  place,  executed  these  works  during  the  space  of  tbrty 
years,  and  at  last  wrote  Deuteronomy  when  old  and  near  his  end. 

V,  The  selection  and  arrangement  of  materials  shew  that  the 
author  was  a  legislator  who  narrated  the  history  of  his  own  legislation. 
1)  In  his  introduction,  which  he  commences  with  the  most  an- 
cient history,  he  narrates  and  carefully  recommends  to  notice  those 
things  in  preference  to  others  which  tend  to  prepare  the  way  for  the 
subsequent  system  of  legislation,  and  for  the  theocracy  and  all  the 
arrangements  which  it  would  involve  :*  such  are  the  worship  of  one 
God  the  creator  and  governor  of  all  things,  derived  from  the  first  man  ; 
its  confirmation  in  the  divine  promises  to  the  patriarchs  ; — the  sacri- 
fices of  the  patriarchs  ; — and  the  divinely  eflfected  deliverance  from 
Egypt,  which  was  the  beginning  of  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises. 

&c. 2)  To  the  histoiy  of  his  legislation  he  adds  scarcely  any 

other  matters  than  such  as  gave  occasion  to  laws,  or  to  the  enforce- 
ment of  obedience  to  their  dictates  ;  or  which  related  to  the  rebellious 
struggles  of  the  people  :  and  yet,  in  going  on,  as  if  he  had  been  press- 
ed for  time,  or  fatigued  with  writing,  he  is  often  silent  concerning 
actions  or  proposed  questions  which  gave  rise  to  new  laws,  whence  it 
happens  that  many  parts  of  his  work  consist  of  broken  fragments. 

3)  He  gives  the  laws  almost  entirely  in  that  order  in  which  they 

were  promulgated,  inserting  everywhere  not  only  the  histories  of  the 
events  which  happened  at  the  same  time,  but  even  the  exhortations  to 
obedience,  the  promises,  and  the  threats,  by  which  they  were  accom- 
panied.  4)  He  repeats  and  explains  some  laws  which  in  the  lapse 

of  years  had  become  neglected,  or  were  perverted  by  erroneous  inter- 
pretations, or  had  given  rise  to  doubts  ;  and  6)  he  changes  others, 
which,  in  the  progress  of  time  did  not  correspond  to  altered  circum- 
stances, or  had  given  occasion  to  abuse. No  one  but  the  legislator 

himself  would  have  conceived  so  truly  of  the  nature  and  order  of 
legislation,  as  not  to  interpose  some  things  not  pertinent  to  the  sub- 
ject, or  of  recent  origin  ; — as  not  to  choose  some  more  convenient 
arrangement  of  the  laws,  suggested  by  the  connexion  of  their  subjects 
and  of  their  natures,  in  preference  to  that  agreeing  with  the  order  of 
their  promulgation  ; — or,  at  least,  as  not  to  have  avoided  repetitions 

*  [See  note  [a]  to  ^  2.] 


OF    THE   OLD   TESTAMENT.  181 

of  the  same  laws,  and  particularly  of  those  wherein  changes  had  been 
introduced  in  accommodation  to  altered  times  and  circumstances,  [a] 

[a)  To  the  contents  of  this  section,  De  Wette  can  only  reply,  with  re- 
spect to  the  2d  head,  that  the  latei  Hebrews  might,  by  their  political 
and  mercaatile  connexions  with  Egypt,  have  obtained  sufficiently  accu- 
rate knowledge  of  its  concerns,  and  that  the  accounts  relating  to  Canaan 
and  the  neighbouring  countries  are  unsatisfactory  and  contradictory ;  this 
last  assertion  he  attempts  to  prove,  ({  149  anm.  c.)  but  without  success : 
with  respect  to  the  rest  he  merely  says  that  "  the  analogy  of  the  whole  his- 
tory of  the  language  and  literature  of  the  Hebrews  contradicts  the  suppo- 
sition that  Moses  is  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch;"  (^163.  anm.)  adding, 
that  "  it  is  inconceivable  that  one  man  should  create  the  whole  literature 
of  a  nation  in  all  its  extent,  both  as  to  matter  and  as  to  language." 
(anm.  d.)     Such  arguments  are  their  own  confutation. 

For  full  answers  to  the  objections  of  Le  Clerc  and  others  against 
the  genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch,  see  WiTSii  Miscellanea  Sacra,  Lib.  I. 
c.  xiv.  and  especially  Graves  on  the  Pentateuch,  Vol.  I.  App.  i. 

A  full  statement  of  the  internal  evidence  for  the  genuineness  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch may  be  found  in  Graves'  Lectures  on  the  Pentateuch,  Lect.  IL 
III.  and  IV.  He  derives  his  proofs  from  the  facts  related  (pp.  57.  ss); 
from  the  minuteness  and  consistency  of  the  details  (pp.  62..^.);  from  the 
entire  impartiality  of  the  writer  (pp.  72.  ss.),  e^ecially  respecting  the 
family  of  Moses  (pp.  76.  ss.)  and  Moses  himself,  compared  with  the  trea^ 
mcnt  of  the  same  subject  by  Josephus  (pp.  78 — 87.);  from  a  comparison 
of  Deuteronomy  with  the  three  preceding  books,  and  of  these  with  one 
another,  (Lect.  IIL);  from  the  circumstances  accompanying  the  miraculous 
events  which  are  narrated  (Lect.  IV.);  and  from  the  connexion  of  these 
miraculous  events  with  the  ordinary  history  of  the  Jews  (Lect.  V.).  All 
this  is  executed  in  a  very  able  manner.  The  review  of  the  character  of 
Moses,  as  given  in  the  Pentateuch,  and  the  examination  of  the  miraculous 
punishment  of  Korah  and  his  company  (pp.  154.  ss.)  are  particularly  well 
worth  consulting.     TV.] 

§  4.     Moses  styles  himself  the  author  of  the  Pentateuch. 

From  what  has  been  hitherto  observed,  it  evidently  follows,  that 
Moses  not  only  may  have  been,  but  in  all  probabiUty  really  was,  the 
author  of  the  Pentateuch.  This  is  also  the  express  assertion  of  the 
writer  himself,  repeatedly  made  in  divers  places,  where  the  same  ar- 
rangement, the  same  style  and  language,  and  the  same  signs  of  affec- 
fjon  and  solicitude  which  were  noticed  in  other  parts  of  the  work,  are 


182         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

observable.  Thus  Deut.  xxxi.  9 — 13,  22,  24.  ss.,  he  says  that  the 
whole  book  was  written  by  himself  ^rom  the  beginning  to  the  end,  and 
was  by  him  committed  to  the  nobles  and  the  priests,  that  it  might  be 
kept  in  the  holy  place  of  the  tabernacle  with  the  ark  of  the  covenant, 
and  every  seven  years,  at  the  feast  of  tabernacles,  be  read  to  the  whole 
assembled  people.  Those  who  say  that  this  passage  relates  only  to 
Deuteronomy,  must  remember  what  has  been  before  observed,  that 
throughout  this  book  the  existence  of  Numbers,  Leviticus,  Exodus, 
and  Genesis,  is  taken  for  granted.  All  these  writings,  therefore,  are 
referred  to  by  Modes,  where,  when  he  speaks  collectively  of  all  the 
antecedent  writings,  as  he  does  not  only  in  Deut.  xxxi.  9 — 13,  22,  24. 
ss.,  but  also  Dent.  i.  5.  iv.  44.  s.  xvii.  18.  xxviii.  58,  61.  xxix.  19.  s., 
26.  xxx.  10.,  he  calls  them  miBH,  the  law,  and  nxTH  mir^n,  this  laWj 

using  by  a  metonymy  the  tiling  contained  for  that  containing,  as  he  him- 
self proves  by  calling  the  same  writings  minn  13D,  the  hook  of  the 

law.  In  all  these  expressions  n*iin  (the  law)  signifies  properly  doc- 
trine and  especially  religious  doctrine,  to  which  not  only  the  laws 
themselves,  but  also  the  doctrine  concerning  the  true  God,  and  all 
the  history  of  the  divine  promises  and  threats,  benefits  and  chastise- 
ments, and  of  the  other  acts  of  Providence,  by  which  that  doctrine 
was  founded,  preserved,  afterwards  purged  from  Egyptian  supersti- 
tions, and  at  last  permanently  established  by  a  civil  theocracy,  may 
be  considered  as  pertaining.  And  as  these  divine  acts  are  narrated 
not  merely  in  Deuteronomy  (where,  on  the  contrary,  they  are  only 
recapitulated  briefly  and  so  as  to  show  that  their  being  mentioned 
elsewhere  was  presumed  to  be  well  known,)  but  also,  and  with  more 
exactness  and  copiousness,  in  Genesis,  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Num- 
bers ;  the  names,  the  law,  this  law,  the  book  of  the  law,  must  refer  to 
all  these  books,  and  designate  them  as  one  work,  not  yet  divided  into 
five  books.  This  application  of  these  names  is  confirmed  by  the  fol- 
lowing circumstances. 

L  In  Ex.  xvii,  14.  God  commands  Moses  to  record  the  violence 
offered  by  the  Amalekites  to  the  Hebrews  when  fatigued  and  weak  in 
consequence  of  their  journey,  the  battle  which  ensued,  and  the  threat 
of  ftiture  extermination  issued  against  them,  l£3D2,  in  the  book,  or. 


OP   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.  183 

if  the  reading  1flD3  is  preferred,  in  a  book.*     According  to  either 

reading,  it  is  evident  that  Moses  had  already  written,  or  had  begun  to 
write,  a  historical  book. 

II.  Ex.  xxiv.  4,  7.  xxxiv.  27,  it  is  remarked,  that  Moses  preserved 
in  writing,  not  the  laws  only,  but  also  the  several  appearances  of  the 
Deity,  and,  therefore,  historical  facts. 

III.  Num.  xxxiii.  1.  s.,  Moses  is  said  to  have  written  an  account  of 
the  encampments  of  the  Hebrews  in  Arabia,  which  is  certainly  mere 
matter  of  history. — If  then  Moses  from  the  departure  from  Egypt 
downward,  recorded  the  laws  promulgated  together  with  the  various 
historical  events  in  a  particular  book,  this  could  be  none  other  than 
that  which,  Deut.  i.  3.  iv.  44.  ss.  xvii.  18.  xxviii.  59,  61.  xxix.  19.  s., 
26.  xxx.  10.  xxxi.  9 — 13,  22,  24.  ss.,  he  calls  the  law,  this  law,  and 
the  book  of  the  law,  and  which  he  publicly  delivered  to  the  priests  and 
princes  of  the  people,  to  be  preserved  in  the  holy  place  of  the  taber- 
nacle. These  form  testimonies  for  the  authorship  of  Moses  much 
more  weighty  than  any  that  can  be  adduced  for  that  of  any  other 
ancient  writer.  For  1)  the  publication  of  no  ancient  book  was 
equally  solemn,  public-  and  known  to  all  its  contemporaries  :  2)  the 
authorship  of  no  ancient  writer  is  equally  certain,  or,  in  the  then  pre- 
valent scarcity  of  books,  could  be  handed  down  to  posterity  with 
equal  facility  :  3)  no  other  book  was,  like  this,  preserved  in  a  piiblic 
and  most  sacred  place  ;  or  4)  received,  like  this,  a  public  and  per- 
petual testimony  from  the  public  observance  of  laws  contained  in  it, 
which  were  never  totally  and  entirely  neglected.  For  the  laws  con- 
tained in  the  Pentateuch  were  observed  for  these  very  reasons,  that 
they  were  written  in  the  book  of  Moses,  and  that  they  were  promul- 
gated by  the  authority  of  that  God  who  had  created  the  universe,  had 
sent  the  deluge  upon  a  disobedient  world,  had  given  ample  promises 
to  the  patriarchs,  part  of  which  he  had  already  accomphshed,  and, 
lastly,  had  performed  such  wondrous  miracles  in  Egypt  and  Arabia. 
(Comp.  P.  I.  §.  8.)  It  may  not  be  amiss  to  prove  more  particularly 

*  [  RoSENMUZLLER  (Schol.  in  V.  T.  Prol.  in  Pent.  p.  5.)  does  not  hesitate  to 
adopt  the  reading  *13D3,   and  infers  from  the  use  of  the  article  the  notoriety  of  the 

book.     Tr.] 


184    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

the  existence  of  this  perpetual  testimony  to  Moses'  being  the  author 
of  the  Pentateuch,  which  we  shall  accordingly  do  by  considering  each 
point  in  its  proper  order,  [a] 

Those  -who  assert  that  these  arguments  are  insufficient  to  prove  that  any- 
thing more  than  the  laws  contained  in  these  books  came  down  from 
Moses,  seem  not  to  have  considered  thoroughly  what  they  would  require. 
Would  they  have  a  notice  added  to  every  section,  purporting  that  Moses 
was  the  author  of  that  section  ?  Who  ever  thought  of  demanding  such 
proof  of  the  genuineness  of  any  other  ancient  writing,  such  as  the  history 
of  Herodotus,  of  Diodorus,  of  Abulfeda,  of  Makrizi,  &c.,  even  though 
it  were  written  in  detached  fragments  ?  Although  the  Pentateuch  is  com- 
posed of  fragments,  yet  every  thing  has  a  bearing  upon  the  general  design, 
the  increase  of  religion  and  morality,  by  doctrine,  by  laws,  by  history,  by 
promises,  and  by  threats.  The  ancient  orientals,  and  even  those  of  a 
much  more  recent  age,  were  not  possessed  of  that  art  of  writing,  which 
enables  one  to  arrange  diverse  and  discordant  materials  in  one  connected 
whole.  Lastly,  Moses,  burdened  with  such  a  multiplicity  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal, civil,  and  judicial  affairs,  and  perplexed  by  such  frequent  journeys, 
had  not  the  leisure  which  more  recent  writers  have  enjoyed  for  polishing 
and  equalizing  their  writings.  Yet  even  these  afford  not  a  few  instances 
of  unconnected  passages,  the  authenticity  of  which  might  be  called  in 
question  with  as  much  reason  as  that  of  similarly  defective  parts  of  the 
work  of  Moses  :  so  that  he  might  well  say  to  his  extravagant  critics  : — 
6  avaiict^TrjTos  ufAWV  •jt^wtos  tov  Xi^ov  sir'  Sfxoi  §aX£<rw. 

[a)  From  this  section  the  following  inferences  may  be  drawn:  1) 
That  Moses  immediately  after  the  Exode  and  onward  committed  to  writing 
the  laws  and  history.  2)  That  this  composition  of  his  own  is  called  by  him 
indifferently  the  book  of  the  law,  and  the  law,  and  consequently,  that  these 
two  expressions,  when  used  of  the  law  in  general,  are  perfectly  synony- 
mous. 3)  That  he  committed  the  book  publicly  to  the  priests  and  civil 
officers.  4)  That  he  commanded  it  to  be  preserved  alongside  of  the  ark ; 
and,  5)  to  be  read  before  the  whole  body  of  the  people  every  seventh 
year.] 

[The  only  reply  given  by  De  Wette  to  the  argument  in  this  section 
consists  in  the  assertions,  that  Ex.  xvii.  14.  xxiv.  4,  7.  xxxiv.  27.  Num. 
xxxiii.  2.  refer  to  single  memoranda  written  by  Moses,  as  to  ancient  and 
authentic  documents,  and  that  the  clumsiness  of  the  forgery  in  Deut. 
xxviii.  58,  61.  xxix.  19,  26,  xxxi.  9,  19,  24,  30.  is  evident  at  the  first  in- 
spection !  (Lehrb.  d.  h.  k.  Einleit.  ^  163.  S.  232.     TV.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  185 

§  5.     The  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  have  been  pithlicly  known  in 

all  ages. 

That  tlie  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  were  publicly  known  in  all 
ages,  from  Joshua  downward,  is  evident  from  the  form  of  the  civil 
and  ecclesiastical  polity,  and  from  the  political  and  religious  laws  which 
were  founded  on  the  history  and  authority  of  the  Mosaic  miracles, 
and  were  never  without  considerable  influence,  so  that  although 
some  were  occasionally  neglected  for  a  time,  yet  invariably  after  a 
while  all  things  were  again  restored  according  to  these  laws.  In  the 
subsequent  books  of  every  succeeding  age,  references  are  made  to  the 
history  as  well  as  to  the  laws  contained  in  the  Pentateuch.  In  the 
historical  books,  those  actions  are  always  praised  which  are  conform- 
able to  the  laws  of  Moses,  and  such  as  are  contrary  to  them,  are 
censured.  The  Psalms  and  Proverbs  breathe  the  very  spirit  of  the 
Pentateuch.  The  prophets  continually  urge  obedience  to  this  book, 
cite  thence  many  passages  of  history,  and  promise  and  threaten  the 
same  things  that  it  promises  and  threatens.  In  a  word,  it  may  be 
said,  that  all  the  more  recent  books  are  commentaries  upon  the  Pen- 
tateuch. Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  II.  §  5.  pp.  25 — 40.  [a] 

[a)  In  the  section  of  the  German  work  here  referred  to,  the  author'has 
entered  very  particularly  into  this  subject.  He  has  brought  together  a 
vast  number  of  texts  from  the  other  Hebrew  writings,  all  of  which  relate 
to  the  Pentateuch,  referring  to  the  Deity  in  the  light  in  which  he  is  therein 
represented,  as  the  Maker  of  all  things,  and  as  Jehovah  the  God  of  the 
Hebrews — to  the  call  of  Abraham  and  almost  all  the  historical  facts 
which  are  recounted  in  the  books  of  Moses — and  to  the  various  laws,  in- 
stitutions, promises,  and  threatenings  therein  contained.  And  it  is  not 
without  reason  that  he  observes,  that  the  more  pious  and  intelligent 
among  the  Hebrews  could  rot  satisfactorily  have  explained  to  them- 
selves their  own  conduct,  views  and  institutions  without  a  knowledge  of 
the  Pentateuch,  and  that  whoever  can  admit  the  absurdities  which  the 
supposition  that  the  Pentateuch  did  not  then  exist  must  involve  in  re- 
gard to  such  a  people,  must  be  strangely  deficient  in  common  sense.  Tr.] 

§  6.     The  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  were  knoum  in  every  age 
under  the  name  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah. 

The  contents  of  the  Pentateuch  are  mentioned  in  every  subsequent 
age  by  the  appellation  "  the  Law, "  as  the  proper  name  of  the  work. 

24 


186    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTIO.N  TO  EACH  BOOK 

and  even  by  the  fuller  title  of  "  the  Law  of  Jehovah.''  And  as  tlie 
Hebrews  are,  in  Deuteronomy,  directed  to  retain  in  their  memory 
not  only  the  laws,  but  also  the  historical  events,  and  the  divine  favours, 
recorded  in  these  books,  and  to  reflect  frequently  upon  them,  and  to 
transmit  them  to  their  posterity  for  their  observance  ;  so  the  same 
directions  are  to  be  found  in  Josh.  i.  7.  s.,  and  are  perpetually  re- 
peated in  all  the  other  books,  Ps.  i.  1 — 6,  viii.  7.  ss.,  xii.  6.  s.,  xix.  1 — 
12,  xxxiii.  6 — 9,  Ixvi.  6.  s.,  Ixxvii.  15 — 21,  xcix.  7.  s.,  civ.  3  ;  in  the 
time  of  David,  Ps.  cxix.  1 — 176,  Ixviii.  2—15,  Ixxxi.  4 — 8  ;  in  the 
time  of  Solomon,  Ps.  cv.  1 — 45  :  in  the  time  of  Rehoboam  or  Abijah, 
Ps.  Ixxviii.  1 — 55  ;  and  during  the  captivity,  Ps.  cvi.  1 — 48.  Comp. 
I.  Chr.  xvi.  8—23,  xxii.  11—13,  II.  Ki.  xvii.  13,  16,  19,  Prov.  vi. 
23,  xxviii.  4,  7,  9.  The  passages  of  this  kind  in  the  writings  of  the 
prophets  are  almost  innumerable.  If  it  be  objected  that  in  none  of 
these  passages  are  the  very  words  of  the  Pentateuch  cited,  it  is  suffi- 
cient to  reply  that  it  was  not  the  custom  of  the  ancients  to  cite  pas- 
sages verbally.  Comp.  Num.  x.  35.  \vith  Ps.  Ixviii.  2  ;  Ex.  xxxiv.  6, 
and  Num.  xiv.  18,  with  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  15,  ciii.  8,  cxlv.  8,  Joel  ii.  13, 
Jon.  iv.  2  ;  Num.  xiv.  22.  s.,  with  Ps.  xcv.  7  ;  Num.  xxiii.  19,  with 
I  Sam.  XV.  29  ;  Lev.  xxvi.  5,  with  Amos  ix.  13. 

§  7.     The  Pentateuch  was  known  as  the  Law  or  Moses. 

As  the  Pentateuch  is  mentioned  in  all  the  other  books  by  the 
names  oHhe  Law,  and  the  Law  of  Jehovah ;  so  also  is  it  frequently  men- 
tioned by  the  appellation  of  the  Law  of  Moses,  or  of  the  Law  which 
God  gave  hy  the  hand  of  Moses,  and  both  these  names  frequently 
occur  in  such  a  connexion  as  to  make  it  evident  that  the  Law,  the 
Law  of  God,  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  the  Law  which  God  gave  hy  the 
hand  of  Moses,  are  one  and  the  same  book,  namely,  the  Pentateuch, 
which  Moses  had  already,  as  we  have  seen  §4,  distinguished  by  the 
name  of  the  Law.  Mention  of  the  Pentateuch  by  the  name  of  the 
Law  of  Moses,  is  very  frequent  in  the  book  of  Joshua,  which,  although 
it  is  much  more  recent  than  the  age  of  Joshua,  was  yet  compiled 
almost  verbally  from  documents  coeval  with  Joshua,  as  we  shall  here- 
after see.  [a]  Similar  mention  occurs  everywhere  in  the  books  of 
Judges,  Kings,  and  Chronicles,  and  in  the  Prophets  ;  .e.  g.  Ju.  iii.  4. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  187 

m. 

11  Ki.  xviii.   12.  xxi.  7.  s.  I  Clir.  xv.  15.  II  Chr.  vih.   13.  xxx.  16. 
xxxiii.  8.  Isa.  kiii.  11 — 14.  Jer.  xv.  1.  &c. 

[a)  That  such  compilations  are  common  among  the  orientals,  see 
RoMEL  in  Abulfeda:  Descript.  Arab.  §  4.  p.  10.  Chr.  Mart.  Fraehiv 
Egfyptus  auctore  Ibn  al  Vardi  ^  2.  Jon.  MEtCH.  Hartmann  Edrisii 
Africa  ed  II.  p.  Ixxiv.  s.  Reiske  Praef.  Annal.  Moslem.  Abulfedae  p.  12. 
and  Prodidagm.  ad  Hagi  Chalpb.  Tab.  p.  228.  [Conp.  Baueri  Iler- 
meneut.  Sac.  Vet.  Test-  Part  II.  sect.  ii.  §  89.  p.  366.  s.    Tr.] 

§  8.     The  Pentateuch  has  been  known  in  all  ages,  as  the  i^ooK  of 

Moses. 

That  this  Law,  Law  of  Jehovah,  Law  of  Moses,  Law  which  Jehovah 
gave  by  the  hand  of  Moses,  was  not  an  oral  tradition,  but  a  booh  dis- 
tinguished by  these  names,  is  attested  in  many  passages.  Thus,  im- 
mediately after  the  death  of  Moses,  Joshua  is  admonished,  Josh. 
i.  7.  s.  to  read  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses  perpetually ;  and  Joshua, 
c.  xxiii.  3 — 16,  exhorts  the  elders  of  Israel  to  do  all  the  things  which 
are  wntten  in  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses,  and  cites  from  it,  not  only 
many  laws,  but  also  histories,  and  threats,  and  promises.  So  also 
Joshua  in  the  last  assembly  of  the  people  recites  in  a  few  words  the 
principal  heads  of  the  Pentateuch,  renews  the  covenant  of  the  people 
with  God,  and  writes  it  in  the  end  o£  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Jehovah, 
which  is  no  other  than  what  c.  i.  7.  s.  and  xxiii.  6.  is  called  the  book 
of  the  Law  of  Moses,  these  being  two  names  of  the  same  Pentateuch, 
just  as  in  c.  viii.  what  is  called  v.  34,  the  book  of  the  law,  in  r.  32  is 
called  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Moses.  Those  who  contend  that  '  tlic 
book  of  the  Law''  is  the  appellation  of  the  writings  of  the  more  ancient 
author  and  that  '  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses  '  designates  the  pro- 
duction of  a  later  compiler,  assume  this  for  the  sake  of  a  hypothesis, 
and  cannot  prove  it :  on  the  contrary,  we  shall  have  occasion  here- 
after to  observe  an  interchange  of  these  appellations  similar  to  that 
already  noticed. — David,  Ps.  xl.  8,  mentions  the  volume  of  the  book, 
in  which  God  required  of  the  king,  not  sacrifices,  but  a  willingness  to 
do  those  things  with  which  God  is  well  pleased ;  and,  Ps.  cxix,  fre- 
quently repeats  that  he  reads,  meditates  upon,  and  keeps  the  law  of 
God,  according  to  the  commandment,  Deut.  xvii.  18 — 20.  He  en- 
joins, I  Chr.  xvi.  40,  that  sacrifices  should  be  ofiered  at  Gibeon 
according  to  the  statutes  of  the  law  of  Moses ;  and  in  his  dying  address 


188         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

to  his  son,  he  attributes  this  law,  contained  in  the  volume  of  the  book. 

to  Moses ;   I  Ki.  ii.  3.    I  Chr.  xvi.  40.  xxii.  13. Jehoshaphat, 

II  Chr.  xvii.  9,  sends  priests  and  Levites  with  the  book  of  the  Law  of 
Jehovah  (which  is  certainly  the  same  with  the  book  of  the  Law  of 
Moses,  as  in  Josh.  xxiv.  26.   I  Ki.  ii.  3.  I  Chr.  xvi.  40.   xxii.  13,) 

throughout  the  cities  and  villages,  to  instruct  the  people. Jehoiada 

gives  orders,  II  Chr.  xxiii.  18,  that  burnt  offerings  should  be  offered, 

as  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses. Amaziah,    II  Chron.  xxv.  4. 

II  Ki.  xiv.  6,  spares  the  sons  of  murderers,  as  it  is  written  in  the  law 
of  Moses,  wherein  Jehovah  commanded  it.  In  the  reign  of  Hezekiah, 
not  only  is  mention  made,  II  Ki.  xvii.  37,  of  the  written  book  of  the 
law  of  Jehovah,  hnt  also,  II  Chr.  xxx.  16 — 18.  xxxi.  3,4,  21,  this  king 
causes  the  Passover  to  be  celebrated  as  it  is  written  in  the  book  of  the 
Law  of  Je  ^-voh.  "Reiethe  hook  of  the  law  of  Moses,  and  the  hook  of 
the  law  of  Jehovah  are  evidently  one  and  the  same  work,  so  that  the 
efforts  of  Bertholdt,  who  endeavours  to  establish  a  difference  between 

them,  are  in  vain. Under  Josiah,  II  Ki.  xxii.  8 — 10,  the  hook  of 

the  Law  was  found  in  the  temple :  in  the  parallel  place,  II  Chr. 
xxxiv.  15,  it  is  called  the  hook  of  the  law  of  Jehovah  by  the  hand  of 
Moses. Josiah,  II  Ki.  xxiii.  21.  II  Chr.  xxxv.  6 — 12,  26,  cele- 
brates the  Passover  according  to  the  word  of  Jehovah  by  the  hand  of 
Moses,  according  to  all  the  things  that  are  written  in  the  book  of  the 
covenant,  sets  apart  those  things  which  are  to  be  offered  to  God,  as  it 
is  written  in  the  hook  of  Moses,  and  does  many  other  things  according 
to  the  laic  of  Jehovah:  11  Ki.  xxiii.  24.  s,,  he  puts  away  necroman- 
cers, magicians,  and  idols,  as  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  Moses,  and 

seeks  God  in  all  things  according  to  the  law  of  Moses. During  the 

captivity,  the  hook  of  the  law  of  Moses  is  mentioned  by  Daniel,  c.  ix. 
1 1 — 13,  and  after  it,  the  written  law  of  Moses  is  mentioned  previously 
to  the  coming  of  Ezra,  Ezr.  iii.  2,  and  Ezra  is  styled  by  the  king  of 
Persia  'learned  in  the  law  of  Moses,'  Ezr.  vii.  6,  21.  Comp.  Neh.  i. 

7.  ss.  viii.  7.  s.,  14,  19.  ix.  19. From  all  this  it  is  evident  that  the 

Law,  the  Law  of  Jehovah,  the  Law  of  Moses-,  the  Law  of  Jehovah 
given  by  Moses,  which  are  so  often  mentioned  in  the  Historical  booksr 
tlie  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets,  are  the  book  of  the  Law  of  Moses : 
and  hence  arises  a  series  of  testimony  continuing  through  every  age, 
in  proof  that  the  Pentateuch  has  been  attributed  to  Moses  from  the 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  189 

tune  of  Joshua  downward.  Inasmuch  then,  as  the  contents  of  the 
Pentateuch  have  been  known  in  every  age,  and  very  many  particulars 
have  been  cited  from  it  in  all  the  subsequent  books,  (as  we  have 
shown  in  §  5,)  which  particulars  are  yet  to  be  found  in  it,  it  is  evident 
that  the  book  of  Moses  so  often  mentioned,  and  attested  by  so  many 
witnesses,  is  none  other  than  our  Pentateuch.  Comp.  the  remarks 
on  the  national  testimony  to  the  genuineness  of  the  sacred  books, 

P.  I.  §  k 

Vater,  in  his  Comment,  in  Pentat.  T.  III.  asserts,  that  these  arguments 
only  prove  that  certain  laws  and  ancient  written  histories  existed  under 
such  names,  not  that  the  whole  Pentateuch  did,  which,  says  he,  consists 
of  parts  entirely  unconnected,  many  of  which  have  been  interpolated  into 
the  writings  of  Moses  at  some  later  period.  The  reasoning,  however,  by 
which  he  endeavours  to  support  this  assertion,  is  nothing  more  than  con- 
jecture, or  rather,  mere  suspicion. De  Wette,  in  his  Beytragen  zur 

Einleitung  ins  A.  T.,  and  Augusti,  in  his  Einleitung  ins  A.  T.,  think  that 
there  is  such  a  coherence  in  the  whole  Pentateuch  as  proves  the  book  to 
be  an  epic  poem.  But  not  to  speak  of  the  artifices  which  they  have  used 
to  make  their  improbable  theory  appear  somewhat  reasonable,  and  in 
some  way  or  other  to  avoid  the  difficulties  which  present  themselves,  the 
arguments  which  they  bring  in  support  of  their  opinion,  would  prove 
with  equal  certainty  that  every  historical  book  which  contains  an  entire 
history,  is  an  epic  poem.  Comp.  Jenaer  Litt.  Zeit.  1.  Jan.  1812,  and 
Leipsic  Litt.  Zeit.  9.  Jan,  1812. 

[De  Wette  (Lehrb.  d.  h.  k.  Einleit.  J  161)  has  attempted  to  answer  the 
reasoning  of  Jahn  in  this  section,  but  with  the  same  •  artifice  '  of  which  J. 
complains,  and  with  an  unparalleled  degree  of  rashness.  His  course  of 
argument  consists  in  making  a  distinction  between  evidence  of  the  exis- 
tence of  laws  and  historic  facts,  and  evidence  of  the  existence  of  the  ac- 
count of  these  laws  and  facts  now  known  as  the  Pentateuch,  and  then 
rejecting  as  spurious  and  posterior  to  the  captivity  every  passage  belong- 
ing to  the  latter  class.   TV.] 

§  9.     Moses  was  the  author  of  Genesis. 

Since  the  events  which  are  narrated  in  Genesis  and  in  the  lirst 
chapter  of  Exodus  are  alluded  to  in  the  time  of  Joshua  and  in  all  the  fol- 
lowing ages  as  well  known,  equally  with  those  in  the  remaining  books  ; 
it  may  be  justly  inferred  that  Genesis,  from  the  tune  of  Joshua  down- 
Avard,  has  been  comprehended  under  the  general  titles  of  the  Law,  the 


190    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

Law  of  Jehovah,  the  Law  of  Moses,  and  tJie  Book  of  the  Law  of  Moses, 
and  thus  attributed  to  Moses.  There  is  the  less  room  for  doubting 
this,  inasmuch  as  Genesis  and  the  first  chapters  of  Exodus  form  a 
necessary  introduction  to  what  follows,*  and,  on  the  contrary,  in  the 
remaining  books  of  the  Pentateuch  there  are  frequent  references  to 
the  events  narrated  in  Genesis  and  the  first  chapters  of  Exodus  ;  so 
that  both  parts  are  closely  connected  in  such  a  manner  that  neither 
would  be  perfect  without  the  other.  The  Hebrews,  reduced  during 
their  residence  in  Egypt  to  the  worship  of  creatures,  and,  as  had  been 
foreseen  by  Moses,  thenceforward  continually  prone  to  idolatry, 
needed  the  instruction  given  in  Genesis  and  the  former  part  of  Exodus 
respecting  the  nature  of  the  Deity  whom  they,  at  mount  Sinai,  had 
acknowledged  as  their  king,  whose  laws  they  had  received,  and  to 
whom  they  professed  their  reverence  and  gratitude  for  his  mercies  by 
their  sabbaths  and  solemn  feasts,  by  their  sacrifices  and  first  fruits,  by 
their  obedience  to  his  laws,  and  by  all  their  acts  of  homage  and  wor- 
ship. If  they  had  been  unacquainted  with  this  part  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, they  must  have  been  ignorant  of  the  nature  of  the  Deity  whom 
they  professed  to  worship  ;  they  could  not  at  that  remote  period  have 
known  their  king  as  God  the  creator  and  governor  of  the  universe  ; 
they  could  not  have  understood  his  frequently  recurrent  titles,  the 
God  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of  Jacob ;  they  could  not  have  been 
able  to  ascertain  what  was  meant  by  the  frequent  references  to  the 
promises  made  to  the  patriarchs  ;  and  they  must  have  been  entirely 
in  the  dark  as  to  the  number  and  nature  of  those  wonderful  works 
which  are  so  frequently  mentioned  in  the  remaining  books  of  Moses. 
On  all  these  subjects  oral  tradition  (which,  however  our  adversaries 
may  dislike  it  elsewhere,  they  think  proper  on  this  occasion  to  extol) 
must,  by  the  general  lapse  of  idolatry,  have  been  exceedingly  depra- 
ved, if  not  totally  obliterated,  in  the  course  of  ages.  He,  therefore, 
who,  in  his  care  for  the  information  of  the  Hebrews  even  of  later 
ages,  committed  the  other  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  to  writing,  would 
not  have  left  instruction  and  information  so  necessary  to  the  Hebrews, 
especially  those  of  later  ages,  as  that  contained  in  the  book  of  Genesis 
and  the  former  part  of  Exodus,  to  be  supplied  by  oral  tradition,  nor 
IS  it  credible  that  he  did. [a] 

*  [Sec  note  [a]  on  ?>  2.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  191 

[a)  Comp.  the  Germ,  introd.  P.  II.  {  9.  pp.  51 — 60,  where  the  author 
goes  considerably  into  detail,  and  shows  particularly  the  tendency  of  the 
contents  of  Genesis  to  prevent  the  Israelites  from  falling  into  idolatry. 

The  arguments  brought  by  De  Wette  (^  158)  to  prove  the  modern  ori- 
gin of  Genesis,  (which  he  ascribes  to  some  period  between  David  and 
Joram,)  are  either  such  as  those  noticed  by  Jahn  below,  (note  to  ^  17) 
or  are  founded  on  the  assumption  that  miracles  and  prophecy  are  impos- 
sible. For  instance  :  the  miraculous  events  related  in  Genesis  prove 
that  a  long  interval  of  time  elapsed  between  the  transactions  which  it  re- 
cords and  the  date  of  its  compilation  ifor  such  accounts  can  only  owe  their 
origin  to  popular  report,  which  must  have  been  of  very  long  standing  to 
become  exaggerated  in  the  degree  in  which  it  is  given  in  Genesis.  The 
prophecies  concerning  the  future  history  of  the  tribes  and  concerning  the 
Messiah,  Gen.  xlix,  and  that  concerning  the  subjection  and  recovered 
freedom  of  Edom,  c.  xxvii.  40,  are,  among  others,  considered  as  proofs 
that  the  book  was  written  at  a  late  period  of  the  kingly  government.  Tr.'] 

§  10.     Interpolations  in  the  Pentateuch. 

It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  these  books  should  have  so  far  esca- 
ped the  common  fate  of  ancient  works  as  to  remain  free  from  inter- 
polation. For  although  the  Hebrews  held  them  in  such  high  esteem 
as  religiously  to  abstain  from  purposely  or  fraudulently  altering  any 
thing  contained  in  them  :  yet  this  did  not  prevent  their  occasionally 
adding  historical  supplements,  such  as  the  titles,  Deut.  i.  1 — 4.  iv. 
44 — 49,  and  the  last  two  chapters  of  Deuteronomy  ;  nor  did  it  hinder 
the  transcribers  from  sometimes  inserting  into  the  text  explanations 
of  obsolete  names  and  things  written  in  the  margin,  under  the  im- 
pression that  they  were  really  parts  of  the  books  to  which  they  were 
appended.  The  Rabbins  had  already  noticed  eighteen  passages  of 
this  kind,  which,  however,  are  not  all  equally  certain  interpolations. 
Modern  writers  have,  with  more  or  less  justice,  marked  many  other 
passages  as  interpolated.  Thus  the  genealogy,  Ex.  vi.  14 — 29  ;  the 
note  respecting  the  age  of  Moses  and  Aaron,  Ex.  vii.  7  ;  the  passage 
Ex.  xi.  3;  and  Deut.  ii.  10 — 12,  20—24.  iii.  9 — 11,  13.  s.  x.  6—9. 
Num.  xxxii.  41.  Deut.  iii.  14,  undoubtedly  do  not  belong  to  the  text.* 
The  genuineness  of  the  remark  that  Moses  was  exceedingly  meek 
(naj^),  made  Num.  xii.  3,  is,  at  least,  doubtful.     But  that  Gen.  xxxvi. 

*  [See  Glassii  PhUol.  Sac.  ed.  Baoero.  Tom.  II.  p.  174.  s.     Tr.] 


192    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

is  an  insertion  of  modern  date,  cannot  be  proved.  Comp.  Germ.  In- 
trod.  P.  IT.  §  10.  p.  61 — 70.  These  and  the  other  interpolations  are 
nevertheless  very  ancient,  since  they  are  found  also  in  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch,  and  must  therefore  have  been  established  in  the  text  in 
the  reign  of  Rehoboam. — They  who  from  such  passages  (which  could 
not  have  been  written  by  Moses,  or  at  least  would  seem  not  to  have 
been  written  by  him,)  however  numerous  they  may  be,  conclude  that 
others  also,  which  labour  under  no  similar  difficulties,  but  merely 
contain  accounts  of  miracles,  were  not  written  by  him,  argue  from 
particulars  to  generals.  This  mode  of  argument,  always  illogical,  is 
the  more  particularly  inadmissible  in  the  present  question,  as  the 
character  of  the  whole  Pentateuch  points  out  an  author  in  every  res- 
pect similar  to  Moses,  and  as  there  is  a  continual  series  of  witnesses 
from  Joshua  downward  through  all  ages,  who  unanimously  attest  that 

Moses  was  the  author. It  is  possible  that  some  things  may,  in  the 

lapse  of  time,  have  fallen  out  of  the  text ;  as,  for  instance,  the  blessing 
of  the  tribe  of  Simeon,  from  Deut.  xxxiii.[o] 

[a)  Comp.  HoRKE  Introd.  Vol.  I.  p.  64.  ss.  ed.  4th.  TV.] 
§  11.     The  Pentateuch  is  not  a  compilation  of  a  recent  date. 

Some  have  supposed  that  the  Pentateuch  was  compiled  in  the  age 
of  David  or  in  that  of  the  Babylonish  captivity,  partly  from  laws,  the 
only  written  documents  left  by  Moses,  and  partly  from  oral  traditions, 
poems,  historical  fragments,  hieroglyphic  inscriptions,  and  public 
monuments  erected  in  memory  of  past  events,  in  the  use  of  all  which 
the  compiler  was  frequently  obliged  to  resort  to  conjecture  for  their 
signification.  This,  however,  is  altogether  repugnant  to  historical 
evidence.  The  Samaritans  have  received  the  same  Pentateuch  which 
the  Jews  possess,  from  a  priest  of  the  ten  tribes,  which  tribes  cer- 
tainly would  not  have  received  from  the  kingdom  of  Judah  a  book 
establishing  not  only  their  religion  but  also  the  form  of  civil  govern- 
ment, and  the  laws  by  which  it  should  be  administered.  Hence  it  fol- 
lows that  the  Pentateuch  of  the  Samaritans  must  have  existed  in  the 
state  in  which  they  received  it  for  an  immemorial  period  of  time  ante- 
cedent to  the  separation  of  the  ten  tribes.  Less  antiquity  cannot  be 
assigned  it,  inasmuch  as  Jeroboam,  who  left  no  means  unemployed 


OF    THE    OLD    TKSTAMENT.  193 

to  alienate  the  ten  tribes  from  the  posterity  of  David  and  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  would  certainly  have  brought  into  public  notice  those  ancient 
writings,  which  only  are  now  by  some  authors  allowed  to  have 
been  the  production  of  Moses,  if  the  least  knowledge  of  them  had 
existed.  In  such  case,  there  could  not  have  been  wanting  old  men 
of  eighty  or  ninety  years  of  age,  who  would  have  said  that  their 
fathers  or  grandfathers  had  spoken  of  other  writings  of  Moses  than 
those  then  extant,  or  that  their  fathers  had  heard  from  their  ancestors 
of  the  existence  of  such  writings.  Jeroboam,  that  he  might  the  more 
thoroughly  alienate  the  minds  of  his  subjects  from  the  kingdom  of 
Judah,  would  have  sought  out  confirmation  of  their  report,  and  would 
have  found  and  restored  the  ancient  work  of  Moses  :  or  at  least 
would  have  made  use  of  this  pretext  to  reject  or  alter  parts  of  the 
Pentateuch  which  were  contrary  to  his  interests,  such  as  the  history 
of  the  golden  calf,  tke  laws  establishing  the  tribe  of  Levi  in  the  sacred 
ministry,  and  that  determining  the  month  in  which  the  feast  of  taberna- 
cles was  to  be  celebrated. Again,  as  the  autograph  of  Moses  was 

preserved  in  the  holy  place  of  the  tabernacle,  and  as  it  was  not  only 
read  over  every  seven  years,  but  copies  of  it  were  also  in  constant 
use  among  the  priests  and  many  of  the  laity,  especially  the  judges ;  a 
new  compilation  of  the  work  could  not  have  been  made  without  giving 
rise  to  commotions  and  disputes  which  would  not  have  been  silently 

passed  over  in  the  history  of  those  times. From  these  remarks  it 

follows,  first,  that  our  Pentateuch  is  at  least  200  years,  i.  e.  five  or 
six  generations,  older  than  the  time  of  Solomon  ;  consequently  that 
they  mistake  who  suppose  it  to  have  been  enlarged  and  brought  into 
its  present  form  in  the  age  of  David  or  Samuel.  But  as  there  is  no 
reason  for  suspecting  such  a  compilation  to  have  been  made  200  years 
before  the  time  of  Solomon  (which  brings  us  to  the  age  of  the  Judges) 
it  follows,  secondly,  that  the  book  of  the  law  of  Moses,  mentioned  .Josb. 
i,  3 — 8.  viii.  31 — 35.  xxiv.  26,  was  the  same  with  the  book  known  by 
that  name  in  the  age  of  Rehoboam,  with  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
and  with  ours,  [a] 

fa)  For  an  excellent^statement  of  the  argument  in  this  \  see  Graves 
on  the  Pentateuch,  Lect.  1.  Vol.  I.     Tr.'] 

9.8 


194     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOk 

§  12.     Arguments  urged  against  the  genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch. 

The  proofs  by  which  some  writers  have  satisfied  themselves  that 
Moses  wrote  nothing  more  than  the  laws  which  are  contained  in  the 
Pentateuch,  and  that  the  historical  parts  have  been  added  in  a  more 
modern  age  from  traditions  or  mythi,*  turn  principally  on  the  narra- 
tion of  miracles :  the  remainder  of  the  work  they  readily  leave  to 
Moses.     The  imphed  syllogism,!  therefore,  upon  which  they  rely,  is 
the  following  :  "  If  Moses  had  written  these  accounts  of  miracles,  the 
miracles  which  they  describe  must  have  been  true  and  divine  :  but 
miracles  are  impossible;  therefore  Moses  did  not  write  these  ac- 
counts."    The  very  point,  therefore,   which  was  to^-be  proved,  is 
taken  for  granted  ;  taken  for  granted,    I  say,  for  the  arguments  by 
which  they  endeavour  to  shew  that  miracles  are  impossible,  are  no- 
thing but  vain  play  upon  words,  \vith  which  the  schools  of  philosophy 
have  always  abounded,   as  the  history  of  ancient  and  modern  philoso- 
phy, and  even  of  that  of  the  present  day,  abundantly  evinces.     How- 
ever this  may  be,  all  such  arguments,  grounded  on  philosophical  dog- 
mas, are  entirely  without  weight  in  critical  and  historical  discussions. 
The  rest  of  the  arguments  which  they  offer,  only  go  to  prove  that  the 
Pentateuch  may  possibly  be,  or  may  possibly  on  historic  grounds  he 
conceived  to  be,  a  spurious  work,  or  a  compilation  from  the  traditions 
of  a  modern  age  :  a  conclusion  which,  if  similar  indulgence  be  given 
to  suspicion  and  conjecture  may  in  like  manner  be  formed  of  almost 
any  other  ancient  book.     The  point  to  be  proved  is,  that  it  is  impos- 
sible that  the  Pentateuch  should  be,  or,  on  historic  grounds  should  be 
conceived  to  be,  the  genuine  work  of  Moses,  and  that  it  must  necessa- 
rily be  a  more  recent  work,  and  be  so  reputed :  this  is  what  should 
have  been  proved  by  historical  and  critical  arguments.     It  is  by  no 
means  sufficient  to  have  started  doubts,  to  have  urged  suspicions,  to 

*  [This  word  is  retained,  as  no  English  word  is  known  which  exactly  corresponds 
to  its  signification  in  its  peculiar  acceptation  among  the  German  Theologians.    Tr.] 

t[This  is  the  openly  avowed  course  of  reasoning  of  De  Wette.  'Common  sense  deter- 
mines '  says  he  '  that  such  miracles  are  impossible.  It  may,  however,  be  inquired  whe- 
ther some  events  did  not  really  happen  which  to  eye-witnesses  and  contemporaries 
seemed  to  be  miraculous.  This  also  must  receive  an  answer  in  the  negative,  as  soon  as 
we  inspect  the  narration  with  any  degree  of  closeness. — The  result  is  already  obtained, 
that  the  narration  is  not  contemporary,  nor  derived  from  contemporary  sources.'l 
Einleit.  ft  145.  Tr 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  195 

liave  framed  conjectures,  to  have  found  fault  with  the  fragmentary  ar» 
rangement  of  the  work,  to  have  observed  some  variation  in  the  style 
and  language,  and  to  have  picked  out  some  passage  not  suiting 
Moses  or  his  age,  but  interpolated.  It  should  be  shewn  that  the  charac- 
ter of  the  writer,  the  subject,  the  language,  the  style,  the  form  and  dispo- 
sition of  the  work,  and  the  object  of  the  whole  or  of  its  parts,  are  alto- 
gether irreconcilable  with  the  character  of  Moses,  with  his  age  and 
with  his  places  of  residence,  so  that  they  can  not  possibly  have  origi- 
nated from  that  author  or  in  that  age,  and  can  not  possibly  be  histori- 
cally considered  as  the  work  of  Moses  or  of  his  age.  For  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  in  this  controversy  the  opponents  and  defenders  are 
by  no  means  similarly  situated.  The  latter  have  for  their  strong  hold 
the  subscription  of  the  author,  Deut.  xxxi.  9 — 13,  22,  24.  ss.,  and 
the  mention  of  him  Num.  xxxiii.  1.  s.  Ex.  xvii.  14.  xxiv.  4 — 7.  xxxiv. 
27  ;  as  also,  the  testimonies  of  others,  from  Joshua  downwards  (Comp. 
above  §  5 — 8) :  this  strong  hold  is  impregnable,  inasmuch  as  no  contrary 
testimony  can  be  adduced  to  prove  that  the  Pentateuch  was  compiled 
at  a  later  period,  nor  even  any  certain  grounds  for  suspicion  that  this 
has  been  the  case,  e.  g.  such  as  would  be  afforded  by  historical  testi- 
mony that  disputes  had  at  any  time  arisen  concerning  the  form, 
contents,  and  size,  of  the  Mosaic  books.  That  the  testimony 
for  the  genuineness  of  these  books  may  be  rendered  suspicious 
by  little  sophisms,  proves  nothing,  since  it  is  possible,  by  conjec- 
tures and  artifices  of  this  sort,  to  render  the  veracity  of  the  most 
honest  man  so  doubtful  as  that  even  an  upright  judge  may  hesitate. 
The  least  that  can  be  required,  is  to  prove,  first,  that  the  author  him- 
self and  all  subsequent  witnesses  either  could  not,  or  would  not, 
speak  the  truth,  and,  secondly,  that  the  Pentateuch  can  in  nomse  be,  or 
be  considered,  a  production  of  Moses  or  his  age.  If,  from  the  arrange- 
ment in  broken  fragments,  from  the  repetitions,  from  laws  which 
in  subsequent  passages  are  to  be  met  with  in  an  altered  form,  from 
the  sometimes  unnatural  order,  and  from  other  similar  circumstances, 
it  is  concluded  that  the  work  cannot  be  the  production  of  Moses  ;  it 
ought  to  be  shown,  that  Moses  could  not  have  composed  a  work  in 
that  manner.  If  a  diversity  of  authors  is  to  be  inferred  from  the  diver- 
sity of  style  ;  it  must  be  shown  that  the  style  of  Moses  could  not  and 
ought  not  to  be  expected  to  change  during  forty  years  spent  in  so 


196    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

many  and  so  great  vicissitudes  as  he  experienced,  and  that  he  neither 
could  nor  might  be  expected  to  make  occasional  use  of  an  amanuen- 
sis, or  make  extracts  from  the  records  of  his  secretaries.  And  after 
all,  what  is  the  diversity  of  style  ?  Not  such,  in  fact,  as  that  which  is 
observed  between  the  Syriac  history  of  Dynasties  written  by  Bar 
Hebraeus,  and  its  continuation  from  p.  673  ;  not  such  as  there  is  be- 
tween the  genuine  works  of  Cicero  and  the  book  de  Consolatione  as- 
cribed to  him  ;  nor  yet  such  as  there  is  between  the  book  of  Deuter- 
onomy and  its  two  last  chapters.  The  differences  which  are  urged 
are  mere  minutiae,  for  instance  such  as  these  :  that  the  same  moun- 
tain is  in  Exodus  always  called  Sinai,  in  Deuteronomy  Horeb ;  that 
in  Deuteronomy  the  phrase    SNntyn  j^in  "i;^3    (to  remove    the  evil 

away  from  Israel)  is  frequently  appUed  to  capital  punishment,  (comp. 
xiii.  6.  xvii.  7,  12.  xix.  19.  xxi.  21,)  whereas  in  the  other  books 
nnon  and  n"':3j;D  N'nn  U'san]  nniDJ,  {to  cut  off  the  soul  from  its  peo- 

plef  or,  the  soul  is  cut  off,)  are  substituted.  But  to  derive  any  advan- 
tage from  these,  it  must  be  previously  shown  that  Moses  neither 
could  nor  ought  to  have  used  different  words  to  express  the  same 
thing  at  different  intervals  during  many  years.  Add  to  this  that  men- 
tion of  Horeb  does  occur  in  Exodus  c.  iii.  1.  xvii.  6.  xxxiii.  6  ;  namely, 
when  the  foot  of  the  mountain  is  referred  to,  it  is  called  Horeb  ;  when 
the  summit,  Sinai. — —That  a  great  deal  too  much  stress  has  been 
laid  upon  the  slightness  of  the  difference  between  the  language  of  the 
Pentateuch  and  that  of  the  later  books,  has  been  already  shown  §  3, 
and  P.  I.  §  75  :  it  may  be  not  amiss,  however,  to  add  some  further 
observations.  A  difference  between  the  language  of  the  Pentateuch 
and  that  of  the  Psalms  and  the  more  ancient  prophets,  and  again  be- 
tween the  language  of  these  and  that  of  the  books  which  were  written 
during  or  after  the  captivity,  does  certainly  exist :  it  is  not,  indeed^ 
great,  but,  as  all  who  are  competent  to  judge  of  the  subject  allow,  suf- 
ficient to  attract  the  attention  of  an  observant  reader.  Now  the 
Psalms  of  David  preceded  the  writings  of  Nehemiah  and  Malachi 
almost  600  years,  during  which  period  both  the  nation  and  its  lan- 
guage suffered  considerable  shocks  :  yet  the  difference  between  the 
language  of  the  Psalms  and  that  of  the  later  works  is  jiot  much 
gi-eater  than  that  which  exists  between  the  language  of  the  former 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  197 

and  the  language  of  the  Pentateuch,  although  only  500  years  elapsed 
between  the  two,  and  through  that  tune  the  nation  and  language  were 
by  no  means  subjected  to  such  injuries  as  during  the  other  period. 
The  small  degree  of  change  is  easily  accounted  for  by  the  facts,  that 
the  orientals  prefer  adherence  to  ancient  customs  before  innovation, 
that  the  Hebrews  were  encircled  by  nations  who  used  the  same  dialect 
or  one  vei7  little  different,  and  that  their  writers  were  accustomed 
to  form  their  style  by  reading  the  Pentateuch,  [a]  Lastly,  even  on  the 
supposition  of  our  opponents,  Moses  wrote  the  laiDs  which  are  con- 
tained in  the  Pentateuch  and  yet  the  difference  between  the  language 
in  which  they  are  embodied  and  that  of  the  subsequent  books  is  not 
greater  than  that  between  the  historical  parts  and  the  same  books  :  so 
that  the  hypothesis  in  question  does  not  at  all  lessen  the  difficulty.  In 
fine,  let  those  who  find  difficulty  in  the  number  of  miracles,  and  on 
that  account  endeavour  to  deliver  Moses  from  the  imputation  of 
having  recorded  them,  recollect,  that  numerous  as  they  were,  they 
scarcely  sufficed  to  keep  the  Hebrews  in  order.  [J]  Moreover,  we 
must  not  suppose  that  in  every  place  where  it  is  said  that  God  spake 
to  Moses,  an  extraordinary  communication  is  intended,  as  the  contrary 
appears  from  Deut.  i.  22.  s.  comp.  Num.  xiii.  2.  Moses,  clothed 
with  a  divine  commission,  had  a  right  to  set  forth  even  those  things 
the  propriety  of  which  he  saw  of  himself,  under  the  sanction  of  divine 
authority.  Comp.  Exod.  xxiv.  12.  xxxi.  18.  xxxii.  16.  and  Deut.  Lx. 
10.  X.  2.  with  Ex.  xxxiv.  1,  27.  s.  viii.  19.  I  Chr.  xxviii.  19.  and  Lu. 
xi.  20,  and  see  below,  §  79,  where  more  is  said  on  this  subject. 
Comp.  Kelle  Vorurtheilsfreie  Wurdigung  der  Mosaischen  Schriften, 
I.  Heft.  1811.    Griesinger  iiber  den  Pentateuch,  1806. 

It  is  strange  that  men  of  so  much  acuteness  as  Vater  and  De  Wette 
should  use  arguments,  the  complete  nullity  of  which  any  one  can  discern : 
as,  for  instance,  when  they  urge  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  law  which 
prescribes  one  altar  for  the  whole  nation  can  be  of  great  antiquity,  be- 
cause it  was  customary  to  sacrifice  on  high  places :  as  if  the  violation  of 
a  law  were  a  proof  that  the  law  had  never  existed  I  If  that  were  the 
case  we  must  conclude  that  the  decalogue  in  the  two  tables  never  ex- 
isted, since  the  nation  frequently  relapsed  into  idolatry,  and  murders, 
thefts,  and  adulteries  were  committed.  Again,  they  contend  that  the 
Pentateuch  did  not  exist  as  a  whole,  because  it  is  not  mentioned  as  such. 
The  same  argument  would  prove  the  non-existence  of  the  decalogue,  as 


198         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

it  is  not  mentioned  from  the  time  of  its  first  being  given  until  the  removal 
of  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  I  Ki.  viii.  9 ;  and  of  the  sabbath,  which  is  not 
noticed  until  the  time  of  Isaiah.  The  rest  of  their  arguments  are  mostly 
of  the  same  sort.  These  learned  men  seem  to  think  that  the  genuineness 
of  ancient  books  is  to  be  proved  by  the  same  arguments  that  are  required 
to  substantiate  recent  events  in  civil  or  criminal  courts,  without  reflecting 
that  no  such  arguments  can  be  applied  in  all  ancient  history,  and  that 

they  cannot  be  adduced  in  favour  of  any  book. It  is  undeniable  that 

the  arguments  for  the  Mosaic  origin  of  these  books  greatly  preponderate, 
and  that  their  adversaries  are  unable  to  bring  the  testimony  of  any  an- 
cient writer  to  prove  their  recent  origin.  Vater  has  imitated  Wolf,  who 
impugned  the  genuineness  of  the  Iliad  and  Odyssey,  with  similar  and 
even  with  somewhat  stronger  arguments :  yet  he  did  not  satisfy  the 
learned,  and  shall  we  allow  the  far-fetched  conjectures  of  Vater  ?  Let 
those  decide  who  are  not  led  by  preconceived  opinion. [c] 

[a)  Add  to  this,  that  the  written  language  of  the  Shemitic  nations  was 
far  less  liable  to  change  than  our  western  languages,  on  account  of  its 
embracing  only  the  consonants,  while  the  vowels  are  left  to  be  supplied 
by  the  reader.  So  the  Arabic  of  the  Koran  and  of  the  most  ancient 
Arabian  poems,  differs  very  little  from  the  written  langttage  of  the  mo- 
dern Arabians,  although  when  pronounced  they  are  widely  different. 
Rosen.  Scholia.  I.  p.  32.  The  infrequency  of  intercourse  with  remote 
nations,  and  the  agricultural  and  pastoral  habits  of  the  nation,  would 
also  tend  strongly  to  prevent  any  considerable  change  of  their  language. 
Parkau,  Inst.  Int.  V.  T.  p.  102.     TV.] 

[b)  For  a  vindication  of  the  Mosaic  miracles  from  the  attacks  of  Dr. 
Geddes  and  others,  see  Graves  on  the  Pentateuch,  Vol.  I.  App.  ii." 
pp.  413.  ss.  See  also  Lect.  IV.  and  V.  of  the  same  work,  for  an  exami- 
nation of  the  accounts  of  miracles  contained  in  the  four  last  books  of  the 
Pentateuch,  and  of  the  connexion  of^ those  miracles  with  the  ordinary 
history  of  the  Jews.     Tr.] 

[c)  A  brief,  but  judicious  and  highly  valuable,  examination  of  De 
Wette's  hypothesis,  may  be  found  in  Graves'  Lectures  on  the  Penta- 
teuch, Vol.  1.  App.  i.  pp.  398.  ss.     Tr.] 


§  13.     The  Pentateuch  has  not  been  re-written. 

The  arguments  already  adduced  are  abundantly  sufficient  to  prove 
that  the  Pentateuch  was  written  by  Moses  :  but  as  our  opponents 
strenuously  maintain  that  the  work  has  been  re-written  in  a  later 
age,  their  hypothesis  on  this  subject  must  be  examined. [a]  We 
must  premise,  however,  such  objections  as  occur  to  the  supposition 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  199 

of  its  having  been  re-written  :  they  apply,  in  what  age  soever  the  re- 
writing may  be  fixed  ;  but  as  it  has  never  been  supposed  by  any  one 
to  have  taken  place  before  the  time  of  David,  or  after  that  of  Ezra, 
we  will  limit  our  inquiries  to  that  interval. 

I.  If  the  work  of  Moses  had  been  re-written,  the  character  of  the 
language  and  style  would  be  that  of  a  more  modern  age  ;  words 
would  be  met  with  which  are  common  in  modern  works,  and  the 
words  pecuHar  to  the  Pentateuch,  at  least  the  greater  part  of  them, 
and  archaisms,  would  have  been  stricken  out :  for  all  these  would  be 
thought  matters  of  little  importance,  and  on  that  account  less  care- 
fully preserved.  The  present  character  of  style  which  is  observable 
in  the  whole  work,  and  especially  in  Deuteronomy,  could  have  been 
feigned  by  no  one  ;  nor  could  any  one  have  so  completely  assumed 
the  person  of  Moses,  or  have  spoken  to  the  people  as  they  were  then 
circumstanced,  in  the  manner  in  which  he  speaks. 

II.  Whoever  may  be  supposed  to  have  remodelled  the  writings  of 
Moses  ;  1)  he  would  not  have  arranged  them  in  the  manner  of  a 
diary,  following  the  order  of  time,  so  as  to  introduce  now  a  law,  then 
a  historical  fact,  then  an  admonition,  and  then  again  a  law  :  2)  he 
would  not  have  repeated  some  laws  as  often  as  they  were  published  ; 
or,  at  least,  3)  he  would  have  omitted  in  the  former  parts  of  the  work 
the  laws  which  are  altered  in  Deuteronomy  :  nor  would  he,  4)  after 
having  previously  given  a  minute  description  of  the  tabernacle  and 
of  all  its  parts  and  utensils,  have  repeated  that  minute  description 
when  he  recorded  its  completion  ;  such  a  repetition  could  only  be 
made  by  one  who  committed  his  account  to  writing  when  he  gave 
orders  for  the  things  to  be  made,  and  again  when  he  received  them 
finished,  as  is  commonly,  done  in  public  records. 

III.  In  a  work  re-written  under  the  reign  of  David  or  at  any  subse- 
quent period,  some  honourable  mention  would  have  been  made  of  the 
ancestors  of  the  royal  fine,  or  of  the  legitimate  succession,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  schism  :  some  things  might  have  been  expected  concerning 
praying  and  singing  the  praises  of  God  in  the  tabernacle,  especially 
in  a  place  so  suitable  as  Num.  vi.  22 — 27  ;  some  concerning  the 
building  of  the  temple  ;  laws  against  drunkenness,  &c.  :  while  on  the 
contrary  many  things  now  read  would  have  been  omitted,  especially 
such  as  are  contradictory?  and  such  as  were  changed  or  neglected  in 


200    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

later  ages,  for  instance,  the  year  of  Jubilee,  the  manumission  of  He- 
brew servants  every  seventh  year,  (comp.  Jer.  xxxiv.)  and  others  of 
a  similar  nature. 

IV.  The  ten  tribes  would  have  rejected  this  work  if  it  had  been 
re-written  under  David  or  at  any  subsequent  period,  were  it  only  be- 
cause it  condemns  golden  calves,  priests  not  of  the  race  of  Aaron, 
and  the  celebration  of  the  feast  of  tabernacles  in  the  eighth  month. 
Comp.  Ex.  xxxii.  and  Num.  xvi.  8 — xvii.  11. 

Let  the  advocates  of  the  supposition  that  the  work  of  Moses  has 
been  re-written,  now  tell  us  in  what  age  that  event  could  have  taken 
place. 

I.  Neither  Ezra,  nor  any  one  of  his  time,  could  have  written  in  the 
language  and  style  of  the  Pentateuch.  [6]  Ezra  is  well  known  from 
his  book,  which  incontestibly  proves  that  he  never  could  have  writ- 
ten in  such  style  and  language.  What  the  Jews  and  some  fathers 
and  divines  have  said  respecting  the  loss  of  the  Pentateuch,  and  its 
restoration  from  memory  by  Ezra,  is  an  absurd  fable.  The  Samari- 
tans, moreover,  would  never  have  received  a  work  from  the  pen  of 
Ezra. 

II.  The  priest  sent  by  the  king  of  Assyria  into  Samaria[c]  to  teach 
the  colonists  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  was  an  exile  and  a  priest  of  the 
calf,  who  would  have  been  even  less  able  than  Ezra  to  write  in  the 
style  and  language  of  the  Pentateuch, — who  could  not  altogether 
have  avoided  the  mention  of  recent  events,  and  who  would  certainly 
have  omitted  the  history  of  the  golden  calf,  and  the  commands  rela- 
ting to  the  priests  of  Aaron's  race,  and  to  the  observance  of  the  feast 
of  tabernacles  in  the  seventh  month  :  not  to  say  that  a  work  re-written 
by  a  priest  of  the  calves  of  Bethel  would  probably  have  contained 
something  in  opposition  to  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  and  would  never 
have  been  received  by  the  kingdom  of  Judah. 

III.  Hilkiah,[d]  it  will  perhaps  be  said,  may,  under  colour  of  a 
manuscript  found  in  the  temple  (II  Ki.  xxii.  8.  II  Chr.  xxxiv.  14. 
comp.  Jer.  xi.)  have  palmed  on  the  king  a  written  copy,[e]  and  thus 
have  excited  his  terror.  But  the  king  is  not  surprised  at  the  work 
of  Moses  being  found  :  his  alarm  arises  from  hearing  the  dreadful 
curses  it  denounced,  which  the  Chaldaeans  were  just  about  to  verify. 
Add  to  this  that  the  Samaritans  would  have  rejected  a  book  altered 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  201 

by  Hilkiah,  a  Jewish  priest,  and  would  have  preserved  the  book  in  its 
ancient  form. 

IV.  Under  David,[f]  as  we  have  already  remarked,  some  notices  of 
the  ancestors  of  the  royal  family  would  have  been  inserted,  and  not 
only  the  laws  relating  to  the  king,  Deut.  xvii.  14 — 20,  but  also  that 
forbidding  attacks  upon  the  Moabites,  Ammonites,  and  Edomites, 
Deut.  ii.  4 — 9,  whom  David  forcibly  subjected  to  his  government, 
would  have  been  omitted. 

If  Ezra  was  not  capable  of  re-writing  the  work  of  Moses,  much  less 
could  he  have  forged  it  entirely,  since  in  that  case  he  must  also  have 
forged  all  the  other  books  in  which  the  Pentateuch  is  cited  or  presumed 
to  exist,  namely,  Joshua,  Judges,  Samuel,  the  Psalms,  and  the  Prophets. 
To  assert,  therefore,  that  Ezra  forged  the  books  of  Moses  merits  ridicule 
rather  than  refutation. 

[a)  Of  these  RosENaiUELLER  (Schol.I.  p.  19 — 29)  enumerates  no  less 
than  twelve,  all  different,  many  contradictory.  Some  attribute  the  Pen- 
tateuch to  the  combined  labours  of  several  authors,  e.  g.  of  Jeremiah, 
Hilkiah  and  Shaphan ;  others  to  the  collections  of  several  successive 
ages;  others  to  Moses,  but  with  large  alterations  and  additions;  others 
to  Hilkiah;  others  to  Ezra ;  and  one  to  the  priest  who  introduced  the 
worship  of  Jehovah  among  the  Samaritans.  Of  those  which  suppose  the 
Pentateuch  re-written,  Bertholdt's  gives  it  the  earliest  date,  supposing 
Samuel  to  have  been  the  writer ;  De  Wette  supposes  it  to  have  been 
compiled  at  different  times  in  separate  portions,  of  which  the  earliest  may 
pertain  to  the  age  of  Solomon  or  that  immediately  succeeding,  the  latest 
to  the  captivity.     TV.] 

[6)  It  has  been  asserted  by  many,  after  Spinoza,  that  Ezra  either  ori- 
ginally composed  the  Pentateuch,  or  wrote  the  whole  anew.  In  later 
times  this  opinion  was  adopted  in  part  by  J.  G.  Hasse  in  his  Aussichten 
zu  kuenftigen  Aufklaerungen  ueber  das  alte  Testament.  Jena,  1785. 
He  subsequently  changed  his  mind,  and  refuted  his  own  positions,  de- 
fending the  genuineness  of  the  Pentateuch  in  his  Entdeckungen  im  Felde 
der  aeltesten  Erd-und-Menschengeschichte.  Hal,  1G05.  PiOSEN.  I. 
23.  s.     7V."1 

[c)  That  he  was  the  compiler  of  the  Pentateuch  was  maintained  by 
Lk  Clerc  in  his  work  entitled  Sentimens  de  quelques  Theologiens 
d'Hollande  sur  I'Histoire  critique  du  V.  T.  Le  Clerc  also  changed  his 
opinion  and  publicly  renounced  it  in  his  Dissertation,  de  Scriptore  Penta- 
teuchi,  prefixed  to  his  Commentary  on  the  Pentateuch.     Tr.] 

[d)  The  hypotheses  of  Volnet,  Nachtigal,  Vater  and  De  Wette, 
all  attribute  the  compilation  of  the  Pentateuch,  either  wholly  or  in  part. 

•2fi 


202  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH    BOOK 

to  the  sole  or  assisted  labours  of  Hilkiah.      Rosen.   Schol.  I.  pp> 
25.  ss.    TV.] 

[e)  Vater  supposes  the  manuscript  found  by  Hilkiah  to  have  been  a 
more  compendious  collection  of  the  Jewish  laws  made  in  the  time  of 
David  or  Solomon.  Others  conjecture  that  it  was  only  the  decalogue, 
or  a  small  collection  of  precepts  mentioned  Exod.  xxiv.  7.  The  incor- 
rectness of  both  these  suppositions  has  been  shown  by  Bertholdt  in  a  dis- 
sertation, De  eo  quod  in  purgatione  sacrorum  Judaicorum  per  Josiam  re- 
gem  facta  omnium  maxime  contigerit  memorabile,  Erlangae,  1817,  4to. 
He  observes  that  "  the  solemn  celebration  of  the  passover  by  Josiah,  ac- 
cording to  the  prescriptions  of  the  book  which  Hilkiah  had  found,  proves 
that  this  book  was  not  Deuteronomy  or  any  smaller  subsequent  compi- 
lation, but  the  whole  Pentateuch.  The  directions  respecting  the  pass- 
over  contained  in  Deuteronomy  (xA'i.  1 — 8)  are  few  and  incomplete ;  the 
principal  laws  concerning  the  feast  of  unleavened  bread,  which  Josiah 
must  have  had  before  him  when  he  gave  directions  for  the  celebration  of 
his  passover,  are  only  to  be  found  in  Exodus  (xii.  1 — 20,)  and  Numbers 
(xxviii.  16—25).'     Rosen.  Schol.  I.  8.  s.  TV.] 

[/)  FcLDA,  Vater,  and  De  Wette,  all  suppose  parts  of  the  Penta- 
teuch to  have  been  composed  in  the  reigns  of  David  and  Solomon.  Ro- 
sen. Schol.  I.  pp.  27.  ss.  TV. 

§  14.     Whether  Moses  himself  wrote  the  Pentateuch. 

If  Moses,  as  Father  Simon  conjectures  (Hist.  Crit.  du  V.  T.  L.  I. 
c.  ii.  p.  17),  had  not  written  anything  beside  the  laws,  and  had  left 
the  historical  part  to  be  written  by  pubhc  secretaries  who  were 
known  by  the  title  of  prophets  ;  1 )  the  style  would  have  varied  more, 
according  to  the  various  portions  of  the  different  authors.  Besides, 
2)  notaries  are  never  mentioned  as  prophets,  nor  are  the  genealogists 
(onaiK^,  properly  scribes,)  ever  designated  by  this  name.     But  3) 

granting  that  these  persons  did  record  some  things,  such  as  the  ac- 
count of  the  different  parts  of  the  tabernacle  received,  Ex.  xxxvi.  8, 
— xxxix.  32  ;  the  catalogue  of  the  people  and  the  Levites,  the  en- 
campments and  arrangements  of'  the  Hebrews,  the  gifts  of  the 
princes.  Num.  i.  1 — iv.  49,  vii.  1 — 88^  xxvi.  1 — 61.  and  some  other 
matters  which  seem  to  be  written  in  the  style  of  pubhc  acts ;  yet 
Moses,  by  borrowing  these,  has  made  them  his  own.  It  appears  also 
from  some  places  that  Moses,  in  conformity  with  a  custom  formerly 
very  prevalent,  dictated  some  parts  of  his  work  to  amanuenses. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  203 

Lastly,  4)  the  accounts  of  the  encampments  of  the  Israehtes,  and 
therefore  certainly  some  historical  parts,  were  written  by  Moses,  as 

is  proved  by  Num.  xxxiii.  2. The  passages  which  Simon  adduces 

from  Flavins  Josephus,  from  the  Rabbins,  and  from  the  Fathers,  are 
not  to  his  purpose  ;  nor,  if  they  were,  would  they  be  competent  au- 
thority respecting  a  fact  of  so  much  greater  antiquity.  Comp.  Le 
Clerc,  Sentimens  de  quelques  Theologiens  d'HoUande  sur  THistoire 
critique  du  Vieux  Testament.  Amsterd.  1685.  Let.  VI. 

§  1 5.     Genesis  is  compiled  frmi  ancient  documents. 

I.  As  every  history  of  an  age  much  antecedent  to  the  time  of  the 
writer  is  taken  from  more  ancient  documents,  there  is  no  ground  for 
excepting  from  the  general  rule  the  book  of  Genesis. [a] 

II.  The  various  titles  which  occur  in  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis, 
ii.  4.  V.  1.  vi.  9.  X.  1.  xi.  9,  27,  intimate  to  the  reader,  that  they 
are  so  many  ancient  documents. 

III.  The  variations  of  style  which  are  observable,  at  least  as  far  as 
the  history  of  Joseph,  confirm  this  supposition,  and  do  not  agree  with 
the  character  of  Moses'  own  productions.  Comp.  especially  Gen. 
xiv.  and  xxiii.,  and  v.  and  x. 

IV.  With  all  this  agrees  the  argument  drawn  from  the  constant  use 
of  the  names  mn"'  and  DTlbN,  even  in  the  more  diffuse  passages. 

It  may  seem,  indeed,  that  the  name  mn''  originated  in  what  is  said 

in  Ex.  iii.  14.  vi.  2.  ss.  But  it  is  to  be  observed  that  this  word  approxi- 
mates nearly  to  the  Aramaean  root  mn  or  Xin,  and  in  Ex.  iii.  14,  is 

only  explained  by  the  Hebrew  HTIN  IB'N  H^riN  /  will  be  what  I  have 

been.  In  the  other  passage,  Ex.  vi.  2,  it  is  not  said  that  the  name  had 
been  before  unknown,  but  that  what  was  signified  by  it  had  not  been 
experienced,  or  in  other  words,  that  God  had  not  as  yet  shown  the 
patriarchs  by  his  actions  that  he  was  mn%  always  the  same  immutable 

being,  who  would  accomplish  what  he  had  promised,  which,  for  the  first 
time,  was  strikingly  evinced  in  the  days  of  Moses.  But  although  this 
name  of  God  was  much  more  ancient  than  the  age  of  Moses,  yet  it  was 
less  in  use,  and  would  seem  to  have  been  utterly  unknown  in  the  primse- 


204  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH    BOOK 

val  language;  so  that  in  Gen.  ii.  iii.  iv.  1.  xiv,  22.  it  may  hare  been 
substituted  fo^  some  obsolete  name  of  God,  just  as  the  proper  names  of 
the  ages  before  the  flood,  in  which  the  Hebrew  language  did  not  yet 
exist,  are  translated  out  of  the  more  ancient  language  into  Hebrew. 

[a)  Moses  must  have  derived  his  knowledge  of  the  events  which  he 
records  in  Genesis,  either  from  immediate  divine  revelation,  or  from  oral 
tradition,  or  from  written  documents.  The  nature  of  many  of  the  facts 
related,  and  the  minuteness  of  the  narration,  render  it  entirely  improbable 
that  the  latter  was  an  immediate  revelation.  That  his  knowledge  should 
have  been  derived  from  oral  tradition,  appears  morally  impossible,  when 
we  consider  the  gieat  number  of  names,  of  ages,  of  dates,  and  of  minute 
events,  which  are  recorded.  It  remains  then,  that  he  must  have  obtained 
his  information  from  written  documents  coeval  with  the  events  which  they 
recorded,  and  composed  by  persons  intimately  acquainted  with  the  subjects 
to  which  they  relate.  That  these  were  few  in  number  appears  probable 
from  the  simple  and  uncultivated  habits  and  the  humble  occupations  of  the 
Hebrews  previously  to  tbfir  removal  to  Egypt,  and  from  their  oppressed 
and  degraded  state  while  there,  all  of  which  are  equally  unfavourable 
to  literary  pursuits  and  historical  research.  It  is  probable  therefore  that 
the  history  given  by  Moses  in  Genesis  is  derived  principally  from  short 
memoranda  and  genealogical  tables  written  by  the  patriarchs,  or  their 
immediate  descendants,  and  preserved  by  their  posterity  until  the  time 
of  Moses,  who  collected  them,  with  additions  from  authentic  tradition  or 
existing  monuments,  under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  into  a  single 
book.    Comp.  Rosen.  Proleg.  in  Gen.  §  III.  Schol.  I.  44.  s.     Tr.] 

§  16.     Documents  collected  in  Genesis,  [a] 

AsTRUo  was  the  first  who  attempted  to  mark  out  the  various  docu- 
ments of  which  the  book  of  Genesis  consists.  [&]  In  his  work  on  this 
subject,*  pubUshed  in  1763,  he  supposed  them  to  be  twelve  in  num- 
ber. He  contended  also  that  the  first  chapters  of  Exodus  were  like- 
wise derived  from  them  ;  this,  however,  no  judicious  person  will 
allow.  EiCHHOEN,  in  his  Einleit.  ins  A.  T.  II.  Th.  §  416—427, 
modified  this  hypothesis  so  as  to  make  only  two  primitive  documents, 
the  one  remarkable  for  using  the  term  niTT  as  the  name  of  God, 

while  the  other  employs  D*iiS«.[c]     Ilgen,  in  his  Urkunden  des  Je- 

rusalemischen  Tempelarchivs,  1798,  makes  a  distinction  of  three 

*  [Conjectures  sur  les  Memoires  originaux  dont  11  paroit  que  Moyse  s'eit  servi 
ponr  composer  le  liyre  de  Genese,  a  BruxHles.  [Paris]  n5">,  8to.] 


OP   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  205 

documents,  two  of  which  use  the  word  D'ilSx,  the  third  nin%    These 

hj^potheses  are  all  ingeniously  devised,  but  no  one  of  them  has,  as 
yet,  received  universal  approbation.  Each  system  1)  rests  upon  far 
fetched  and  arbitrary  opinions,  and  2)  makes  the  collector  of  the 
documents  to  have  resembled  in  views  and  dispositions  the  framer  of 
the  system.  3)  Other  hypotheses  of  the  same  kind  might  be  con- 
trived, and  in  fact  a  new  one  has  lately  been  proposed  by  Kelle, 
in  1811 — 12  (Vorurtheilsfreye  Wiirdigung  der  Mosaischen  Schrif- 
ten,)[d!]  and  yet  none  will  be  universally  acceptable  ;  and,  after  all, 
if  any  is  capable  of  being  estabUshed  by  more  ingenious  arguments 
than  the  rest,  the  only  advantage  to  be  derived  will  be,  that  then  the 
documents  which  constitute  the  book  of  Genesis  may  be  enumerated. 
It  may  be  sufficient,  therefore,  to  determine  where  each  document 
begins  and  ends,  which,  in  the  first  part  of  Genesis  at  least,  may  be 
done  with  safety.  Comp.  Vater.  Comm.  liber  den  Pentat.  IV.  Th. 
S.  696— 728.[e] 

[a)  To  an  English  reader  the  statement  of  the  compilation  of  the 
book  of  Genesis  from  pre-existent  documents,  may,  at  first  sight,  appear 
strange  and  in  some  degree  revolting,  it  will,  however,  bear  the  test  of 
closer  examination,  and  in  proportion  as  our  acquaintance  with  the  book 
itself  increases,  our  belief  of  the  fact  of  its  compilation  from  pre-existent 
documents  will  also  strengthen.  Pareau,  a  sober  and  moderate  critic, 
uses  the  following  strong  language  :  "  Many  have  observed,  and  proved 
beyond  a  doubt,  that  the  book  of  Genesis  is  formed  of  various  fragments, 
written  by  divers  authors,  and  merely  compiled  by  Moses,  and  thus  pre- 
fixed to  his  own  history."  Inst.  Interp.  Vet.  Test.  p.  112.  Traj-  ad  Rhen. 
1822.  He  draws  from  the  fact  a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  the  credi- 
bility and  historic  accuracy  of  the  book.  The  inspired  authority  of  the 
work  is  in  nowise  affected  by  this  theory,  for,  as  Jahn  has  well  remarked, 
(5  20.  Jin.)  some  of  the  documents  are  of  such  a  nature  that  they  could 
have  been  derived  only  from  immediate  revelation ;  and  the  whole  being 
compiled  by  an  inspired  writer  have  received  the  sanction  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  in  an  equal  degree  with  his  original  productions.     7V-] 

[6)  The  theory  of  pre-existent  documents  was  first  cautiously  advan- 
ced by  ViTRiNGA,  Observationes  Sacrae,  Lib.  I.  c.  iv.  J  23.  p.  36.  ss.  ed. 
Franeq.  1712.  It  was  soon  after  again  proposed  by  Le  Cene,  Bible 
de  Le  Cene,  Tom.  I.  p.  ix.  col.  2.  and  p.  x.  col.  1.  and  2,  which,  how- 
ever, was  not  printed  until  1741.  (See  an  able  dissertation  on  Le  Cene 
and  Astruc  in  La  Bible  de^VENCE,  Tom.  I.  p.  286.  ss.  ed.  2.)     To  a 


•5 


206         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOK 

moderate  extent,  it  has  been  adopted  by  Calmet,  in  his  Commentaire 
Litterale,  Tom.  I.  P.  I.  p.  xiii.,  and  by  Bishop  Gleig,  Introd.  to  Slack- 
house's  Hist,  of  the  Bible.  See  Horne  s  IntroJ.  Vol.  1.  p.  56  s.  ed.4th. 
See  also  a  list  of  the  writers  by  whom  this  opinion  has  been  supported, 
with  accurate  references,  in  Holden  on  the  Fall,  c.  ii.  p.  32.  s.     TV.] 

[c)  Whatever  is  not  drawn  from  these  two,  he  considers  as  the  au- 
Ihor's.  Einleit.loc.  cit.;  Repertor.  fiir  Bibl.  u.  Morg.  Lit  P.  V.  S.  l85.rf. 
and  Th.  IV.  S.  173.  flf.  De  Wette  agrees  with  this  hypothesis  so  far 
as  to  divide  the  book  of  Genesis  into  two  distinct  parts,  distinguishable 
by  the  use  of  the  word  nin'  or  of  DTlbx.     The  part  using  the  latter 

term  he  considers  as  one  independent  regularly  planned  and  connected 
document,  interpolated  with  the  passages  which  constitute  the  second 
part.  The  original  state  of  this  latter  part  he  considers  uncertain,  but  is 
inclined  to  think  it  derived  from  several  sources.  Comp.  his  Einleit. 
5  130,  in  a  note  to  which  he  gives  a  table  of  the  origin  of  every  passage 
in  Genesis,  according  to  his  judgment.  Dr.  Geddes  has  also  advan- 
ced the  same  hypothesis  as  Eichhorn,  in  his  Translation  and  Critical 
Remarks.     Tr.] 

[(f)  Which  has  since  been  retracted  in  his  work  called  Die  heiligen 
Schriften  in  ihrer  Urgestalt,  deutsch  und  mit  neuen  Anmerkungen,  von 
K.  G.  Kelle,  Freyberg,  1817,  where  he  contends  that  Genesis  consists 
of  a  single  genuine  work  of  Moses,  much  interpolated  by  the  priests  of 
the  race  of  Ithamar,  and  takes  great  pains  to  separate  the  supposed  in- 
terpolations from  the  genuine  work.  See  a  refutation  of  his  hypothesis 
in  Rosen.  Schol.  I.  pp.  32.  ss.     TV.] 

[e)  RosENMUELLER  goes  SO  far  as  to  assert  that  it  is  impossible  to  make 
any  certain  distinction  between  the  several  documents  of  which  the  book 
of  Genesis  is  composed.  This  assertion  he  maintains  at  some  length,  ex- 
amining the  different  criteria,  and  showing  their  want  of  certainty. 
In  this,  with  the  exception  of  the  different  titles,  (e.  g.  ii.  4.  v.  1,  &c.), 
he  is  successful,  and  has  certainly  proved  the  futility  of  all  attempts  to 
discover,  after  a  lapse  of  3000  years,  the  precise  nature  and  extent  of 
the  records  used  by  Moses  in  the  compilation  of  his  book.  The  more 
modern  writers  on  this  subject,  (llgen,  Vater,  and  De  Wette,)  point  out 
a  great  number  of  passages  as  repetitions,  all  of  which  they  adduce  as 
proofs  of  the  multiplicity  of  documents,  and  endeavour  to  arrange  in  ac- 
cordance with  their  respective  systems.  The  fallacy  of  this  procedure 
is  ably  proved  by  Rosenmiiller.  Comp.  his  Schol.  T.  I.  pp.  46 — 54,  and 
comp.  as  an  illustration  of  his  remarks  on  the  last  mentioned  subject,  the 
table  given  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  130.  anm.  b.     TV.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  207 

§  17.     Age  of  these  documents. 

From  the  want  of  evidence  it  is  impossible  to  define  the  age  of 
these  documents  ;  yet  from  their  nature  and  character  it  is  plain  that 
they  are  very  ancient,  and  indeed  that  the  first  in  order  are  more  an- 
cient than  those  which  follow. 

I.  In  those  first  in  order  as  far  as  the  history  of  Abraham,  all  mat- 
ters, even  those  which  are  least  connected  with  the  senses,  are  repre- 
sented as  they  appear  to  the  eyes  and  other  senses,  a  practice  which 
is  characteristic  of  the  most  remote  antiquity. 

II.  The  language  in  the  first  fragments  is  barren,  wanting  copious- 
ness, and  everywhere  somewhat  harsh  ;  in  the  progress  of  the  work, 
it  becomes  richer,  and  more  flexible,  yet  words  which  are  obsolete 
and  obscure  through  age  are  every  where  to  be  met  with,  and  are 
sometimes  briefly  explained.  Proofs  of  these  assertions  may  be  ob- 
tained by  examining  Gen.  ii.  25.  iii.  1 .  where  onj?  is  used  for  naked 

and  subtile;  vi.  14. 13J ;  xv.  2.  n^n  ;  om:}N  Gen.  xvii.  25,  with  the 

explanatory  adjunct,  D'lJ  jiDn  3N,  comp.  the  Arabic  C*^'' j;  '^'3 

inDn,  Gen.  xxxix.  20.,  to  which  is  added  the  explanation  '^IS'K  oipD 

D'liDK  ■^brsn  'TDK ;  rh^l.  Gen.  xi.  7  ;  dk^  for  a  sign,  Gen.  xi.  4  ;  '\V0i 

Gen.  iii.  15,  with  a  different  meaning  from  what  it  has  in  the  other 
places  in  which  it  occurs.  Job.  ix.  17.  Ps.  cxxxix.  11.  So  also 
there  are  certain  peculiar  phrases  :  Gen.  ix.  19,    ^ixrrSo  nV3J  ; 

V    T   T  T  T  :    IT 

Gen.  X.  18.  ninsti^n  ixi33,  and  Gen.  x.  5.  D'liin  "K  nnsJ  n^N?3,  and 

others.  Hence  also  arises  the  geographical  obscurity  in  Gen.  x. 
and  xiv. 

III.  The  manner  of  living  depicted  in  them  is  exceedingly  simple, 
luxury  having  been  introduced  in  the  following  ages  from  Egypt,  for 
which  we  have  the  authority  of  profane  writers  and  the  evidence 
which  is  afforded  by  the  ruins  of  buildings  yet  remaining. 

IV.  Some  things  are  presumed  to  be  known  to  the  original  readers, 
as  in  the  history  of  Lamech,  Gen.  iv.  23.  s.;  in  the  account  of  the 
giants,  vi.  4  ;  and  in  that  of  Nimrod,  x.  9  :  which  show  that  these  do- 


208    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

cuments  have  come  down  from  an  age  in  which  more  was  generally 
known  respecting  these  persons  than  is  therein  recorded. 

The  arguments  which  are  brought  to  show  that  these  documents  are 
of  recent  date,  have  been  repeatedly  refuted  by  interpreters.  Such  is 
that  drawn  from  the  remark,  Gen.  xii.  6.  xiii.  7-  that  the  Canaanites 
were  then  in  the  land ;  as  if  this  fact  could  have  been  unknown  and  there- 
fore required  to  be  mentioned  at  any  recent  age,  when  the  most  ignorant 
Hebrew  must  have  been  acquainted  with  it !  the  meaning  undoubtedly 
is,  '  they  were  atready  in  the  land.'  Such  are  those  founded  on  the  pro- 
leptical  mention  of  Bethel  and  Zoar,  Gen.  xii.  8.  xiii.  3.  comp.  xxxv.  1. 
xxviii.  19.,  and  xiii.  10.  xiv.  2,  8  comp.  xix.  22.  s.  and  similar  passages, 
which  only  show  that  they  were  not  written  before  the  origin  of  those 
names,  not  that  they  were  written  at  a  much  later  period.  Such  is  that 
drawn  from  the  declaration  Gen.  xxxvi.  31.  that  there  were  kings  in 
Edom  '  before  there  reigned  any  king  over  the  children  of  Israel ;'  which 
refers  to  Gen.  xvii.  6,  16.  where  it  is  promised  that  kings  should  rise  out 
of  the  seed  of  Abraham. — If  these  answers  should  not  be  thought  satisfac- 
tory, the  passages  may  be  considered  as  marginal  glosses  introduced  into 
the  text. 

§  18,     Historical  credit  of  these  documents. 

However  ancient  these  documents  may  be,  their  date  is  more  re- 
cent than  that  of  the  events  which  they  describe.  The  historical 
accounts  which  they  contain  must,  therefore,  have  been  propagated 
for  some  space  of  time,  and  part  of  them  during  many  centuries,  by 
oral  tradition.  Yet  the  substande  of  them  has  not  been  corrupted. 
They  are  not  the  fictions  or  allegories  by  which  in  very  ancient  times 
wise  men  chose  to  veil  their  philosophical  opinions,  nor  yet  mythi  or 
histories  intermixed  with  mythi,  such  as  other  nations  relate  concern- 
ing their  earliest  ages ;  but  they  are  true  histories.  This  will  be  evi- 
dent from  the  following  considerations. 

I.  These  relations  were  committed  to  writing  nearly  a  thousand 
years  before  the  mythi  of  the  most  ancient  nations.  But  in  those 
remote  times,  the  ordinary  life  of  man  extended  to  so  great  a  length, 
that  there  could  be  no  necessity  for  oral  tradition  to  pass  through  the 
mouths  of  many  generations.  Methusaleh  was  contemporary  with 
Adam  during  the  first  243  years  of  his  life,  and  with  Noah  during  the 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  209 

last  600,  and  Noah  was  coeval  with  Abraham  for  58  years.  Thus 
three  generations  would  have  transmitted  the  account  of  the  creation 

of  the  world  to  Abraham. The  history  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and 

Jacob,  was  committed  to  writing  not  long  after  their  time,  and, 
besides,  from  Jacob  to  Moses  only  four  generations  intervened.  (See 
below,  notes  1  and  2.)  Add  to  all  this,  that  the  pious  patriarchs 
esteemed  these  accounts  of  great  importance,  as  being  the  foundation 
of  religion,  and  as  such  taught  them  to  their  children,  and  in  old  age 
frequently  repeated  the  oft  told  tale,  so  that  there  coidd  be  Uttle  dan- 
ger of  the  history  being  misunderstood  or  designedly  corrupted.  Such 
parts  as  had  been  clothed  in  verse,  vestiges  of  which  occur  Gen.  iii. 
24.  iv.  23.  s.,  would  be  much  more  easily  retained  in  memory,  and 
could  not  be  altered  without  injuring  the  parallelism,  or  disturbing 
the  harmony,  which  must  lead  to  the  observation  and  correction  of 
the  error. 

II.  The  events  related  are  fewer  and  the  narratives  more  obscure 
in  proportion  to  the  antiquity  of  the  accounts  and  the  length  of  time 
during  which  they  were  preserved  by  tradition  ;  while  on  the  contrary 
those  which  are  the  most  modern  are  the  fiillest.  From  this  it  is 
evident  that  their  compiler  must  have  rejected  all  uncertain  and  sus- 
picious accounts,  very  many  of  which  had  no  doubt  come  down  from 
a  period  of  considerable  antiquity,  and  must  have  received  those  only 
the  correctness  of  which  was  unquestionable  ;  and  moreover  that  he 
has  ventured  to  add  scarcely  any  of  his  own  remarks  for  the  explana- 
tion of  the  difficulties  arising  from  these  causes. 

III.  The  subjects  of  the  narrative  are  of  the  simplest  nature,  and 
altogether  dissimilar  to  those  which  fill  the  earliest  histories  of  other 
nations.  If  in  any  respects  a  slight  similitude  is  discoverable,  it  is 
still  apparent  that  the  latter  are  feigned  or  amphfied  and  distorted  by 
fictions,  while  the  former  exhibit  merely  the  simple  truth  :  this  was 
acknowledged  without  any  hesitation  by  the  heathen,  whether  learned 
or  unlearned,  who  in  the  first  ages  of  Christianity  turned  from  the 
contemplation  of  the  heathen  fables  to  that  of  the  Jewish  Scriptures. 

IV.  Those  doubtful  or  partly  fictitious  narrations,  or  if  the  defini- 
tion should  be  preferred,  philosophical  opinions  clothed  in  allegorical 
language,  which  are  known  by  the  name  of  Mythi,  are  single  frag- 
ments, which  have  no  real  connexion  either  with  each  other,  or  vnth 


210  PARTICULAR    IJNTKODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

liistory  in  general :  but  in  our  documents  all  the  parts  are  indissolubly 
connected  with  each  other  and  with  history. 

V.  The  mythi  are  replete  with  fictions  relating  principally  to  gods 
and  goddesses  and  demigods,  to  their  wars  and  even  to  their  obscene 
and  sexual  intercourse.  Tliey  relate  to  demons,  heroes,  nymphs, 
and  metamorphoses,  and  to  the  inventors  of  useful  arts  and  founders  of 
noble  families,  whose  origin  they  fabulously  ascribe  to  the  intermix- 
ture of  deities  with  men.  In  our  fragments  nothing  of  this  kind  is  to 
be  found.  They  relate  only  to  one  God  the  creator  and  governor  of 
the  universe,  and  the  preserver  and  protector  of  religion  and  morals, 
for  the  establishment,  protection  and  promotion  of  which  all  that  they 
contain  conspires  ;  and  they  hold  forth  the  prospect  of  an  auspicious 
period  when  the  true  religion  and  virtue  should  be  propagated  among 
all  nations.  That  this  prediction  has  been  fulfilled,  it  is  impossible 
to  deny. 

VI.  Should  it  be  granted  that  alterations  may  have  been  made  in 
these  histories,  yet  even  this  would  not  render  the  character  of  the 
principal  parts,  upon  which  the  history  rests,  suspicious.  The  parts 
which  would  be  most  liable  to  suspicion  of  corruption  or  fiction, 
would  be  those  bordering  on  the  marvellous,  such  as  the  accounts  of 
divine  revelations.  But  these  very  revelations  contain  predictions  of 
the  perpetual  duration  of  the  religion  which  they  teach  among  the 
posterity  of  its  first  possessors,  and  of  its  future  propagation  among 
all  nations,  which  it  would  have  been  impossible  for  the  authors  of 
these  documents,  be  they  who  they  might,  to  invent.  Gen.  xii,  1 — 3. 
xviii.  18.  xxii.  18.  xxvi.  4.  xxviii.  14.xviii.  19.  andxvii.  4 — 14.  Comp. 
Biblisch.  Archseol.  P.  II.  Th.  II.  §  63.  S.  214—217.  [Upham.  §  303.] 
And  even  the  idea  of  God,  which  pervades  all  these  documents,  is  such 
as  would  never  have  originated  with  unassisted  man.  See  Germ. 
Introd.  Preface.  P.  II  §  1.  p.  viii — xxxii. 

VII.  If  these  narrations,  like  the  mythi  of  other  nations,  had  been 
altered  to  suit  the  fancy  of  the  narrator,  they  would  have  differed  in 
many  respects  from  their  present  form.  As  good  morals  are  every 
where  inculcated  by  them,  the  immoralities,  s.nd  facts  of  doubtful 
character,  wliich  now  occur,  and  are  little  honourable  to  the  principal 
personages  of  the  history,  would  have  been  omitted.  The  narrative 
of  ^^<;  destruction  of  the  cities  in  the  vale  of  Siddim.  would  not  have 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  211 

corresponded  so  accurately  with  the  nature  of  things  ;  the  decrepi- 
tvde  of  Isaac  (the  son  of  his  parents'  old  age)  would  Jiave  been  defer- 
red to  a  greater  age;  the  speeches  of  Jacob,  Gen.  xliii.  1 — 14,  and 
Judah,  Gen.  xhv.  18 — 44,  would  hardly  have  been  so  exactly  suited 
to  their  respective  characters  and  situations  ;  the  general  character  of 
the  personages  would  not  have  been  preserved  with  sucli  uniform  and 
permanent  consistency,  but  would  rather  have  ai)proximated  to  cari- 
cature ;  the  400  years,  Gen.  xv.  30,  would  have  been  changed  into 
430  ;  the  apparent  contradictions  would  have  been  reconciled  :  in  a 
word,  the  rohole  narration  would  not  have  been  so  perfectly  consen- 
taneous to  the  general  course  of  things  observable  in  other  histories. 

1.  Some  have  considered  the  longevity  which  is  ascribed  to  the  men 
of  the  first  ages  of  the  world  as  a  mythus,  simply  because  they  imagine  it 
to  be  impossible  that  the  human  body  should  subsist  so  many  years.  But 
that  every  thing  was  the  same  in  those  ages,  especially  before  the  deluge, 
as  it  is  now,  no  reasonable  person  will  assert.  Why  then  must  the  age 
of  man  necessarily  have  been  then  the  same  as  it  is  now  ?  All  other  na- 
tions extend  the  lives  of  the  men  of  those  ages  to  some  thousands  of  years ; 
our  documents,  therefore,  which  give  a  far  more  moderate  duration  of 
existence,  are  not  to  be  suspected  of  falsehood  in  this  particular. 

2.  It  is  a  common  opinion,  that  in  Ex.  vi.  14 — 19,  some  generations 
are  omitted,  because  430  years  make  13  generations,  instead  of  4.  But 
as,  in  Gen.  xv.  13,  16,  4  generations  are  in  express  terms  made  equiva- 
lent to 400  years;  and  as  the  215  years  which  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 
spent  in  Canaan,  occupied  only  two  generations :  it  is  evident  that  a 
generation  at  that  time  comprehended  a  hundred  years,  and  not  merely 
34,  as  was  the  case  in  a  much  later  period.     Comp.  Num.  xxvii.  l.[a] 

[a)  The  following  expression  of  opinion  on  the  subject  of  the  two  pre- 
ceding sections  is  valuable  as  coming  from  a  man  so  loose  and  sceptical  as 
Semler.  "  Nee  superest  vel  mediocris  ratio,  quae  persuadeat,  istos  libros 
antiquioris  historiae  Israelitica  testes,  sensim  a  quibusdam  auctoribus 
interpolates  fuisse  atque  sic  mutates,  ut  recentius  alit[Uod  atque  confic- 
tum  argumentum  loco  vetustiorum  partium  illatum  fuerit  atque  permu- 
tatum.  Omnia  potius  summam  rerum  antiquitatem  spirant,  atque  illud 
tempus  referunt,  quo  minus  culta  hominum  ingenia  sensibus,  symbolis 
atque  picturis  adsueti  erant,  et  externarum  rerum  ministerio  ducebantur ; 
adeo  res  ipsae  facile  fidem  faciunt  antiquitatis ;  vetustissima  igilur  et 
■ingenuafuit  haec  rerum  domesticarum  traditio:  quae,  si  comparatur  cum 
istis  exemplis  aliamm  2:entium,  ae.gyptiacas.  clialdaicas,  etc.  fabulas  satis 


'212  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

luculenter  aequitate  et  probabilitate  insita  vincat."  Semler  was  no  timid 
critic ;  he  could  suspect  and  reject,  when  he  pleased,  as  boldly  and  as 
groundlessly  as  any  of  his  successors ;  and  even  with  respect  to  the  Pen- 
tateuch, he  considered  it  merely  as  an  ancient  and  interesting  portion  of 
uninspired  history  ;  but  a  comparison  of  his  opinions,  as  above  expressed, 
with  those  of  Vater,  De  Wette,  &c-,  will  show  how  far  the  disciples  have 
outstripped  their  master,  and  how  uncertain  it  is  where  the  career  of  criti- 
cism will  stop,  when  once  the  landmarks  of  antiquity  are  removed.    TV.] 

§  19.     Arguments  brought  to  prove  the  existence  of  Mythi  in  the 

Pentateuch. 

The  arguments  which  are  urged  against  the  historical  credit  of  the 
documents  from  which  the  book  of  Genesis  has  been  compiled  do  not 
prove  that  they  have  been  altered,  but  only  that  they  may  have  been  ; 
that  is,  in  effect,  they  prove  nothing,  for  the  argument  from  possibili- 
ties to  facts  is  void  of  all  force.  The  arguments  brought  to  prove 
that  the  narrations  contained  in  these  documents  cannot  be  true,  are 
entirely  worthless.  Such  is  the  assertion  that  our  first  parents  could 
not  have  immediately  narrated  the  events  described  Gen.  ii.  4. — iii.  24, 
in  consequence  of  the  imperfection  of  their  language  ;  and  that  when 
their  stock  of  words  had  increased,  they  could  not  have  been  able  to 
remember  the  events  of  their  earliest  existence,  because  without 
words  nothing  more  than  obscure  recollections  of  things  can  be  re- 
tained. But  neither  of  the  parts  of  this  assertion  is  true.  For  as  to 
the  former,  our  first  parents  were  adult  in  the  first  moment  of  their 
existence,  possessing  the  use  of  all  the  faculties  of  their  minds  and  of 
all  the  members  of  their  bodies.  They  had,  moreover,  both  the 
power  of  speech  and  incitement  to  its  use,  so  that,  as  soon  as  the  ideas 
which  must  have  entered  their  minds  immediately  upon  their  exis- 
tence were  conceived,  they  expressed  them  in  language.  With  res- 
pect to  the  other  part  of  the  assertion,  the  ideas  produced  during  the 
first  moments  of  their  existence,  when  in  possession  of  all  their  intel- 
lectual powers,  whether  by  the  impressions  of  the  senses,  or  by  the 
instructions  of  the  Deity,  would  be  the  most  tenaciously  retained  by 
the  mind,  for  the  very  reason,  that  they  were  the  first :  they  would  be 
treasured  in  its  inmost  recesses,  so  as  to  be  readily  recoUected  during 
the  remainder  of  life,  and  easily  narrated  when  language  should  be- 
come sufficiently  copious  to  express  them.     For  more  on  this  sub- 


'  OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  213 

ject,  see  Germ.  Introd.  P.  II.  S.  I.  §  19.  p.  117—125,   and  Kelle 

Vorurtheilsfreie  Wurdigung  der  Mosaischen  Schriften,  Ites  und  3tes 
Heft,  1812  Freiberg;  Meyer  Apologie  der  geschichtlichen  Auf- 
fassung  der  historischen  Biirher  des  A.  T.1811.  Sulzbach;  Weiller 
Ideen  zur  Geschichte  der  Entwickelung  des  religiosen  Glaubens,  I. 
und  II.  Th.  1808—1812. 

§  20.     Whether  Gen.  i.  1 — ii.  3,  is  one  of  the  most  ancient  docu- 
ments. 

Whether  the  geogony,  or,  as  some  consider  it,  the  cosmogony, 
contained  in  Gen.  i.  1 — ii.  3,  is  to  be  reckoned  in  the  most  ancient 
class  of  tiocuments,  has  been  disputed.  There  can  indeed  be  no 
doubt  that  the  doctrine  of  a  creating  Deity,  and,  consequently,  that 
of  the  creation  and  origin  of  all  things,  are  maintained  through  the 
whole  of  Genesis  ;  for  the  object  of  all  the  documents  from  which  it 
is  compiled,  is  to  teach  that  this  doctrine  was  revealed  to  our  first 
parents  ;  that  it  was  preserved  by  special  divine  providence  until  the 
time  of  Abraham,  and  that  it  was  to  be  preserved  and  at  last  propa- 
gated among  all  nations.  Some  things,  moreover,  that  are  contained 
in  this  geogony,  are  expressly  repeated  in  the  subsequent  parts  of  the 
book.  Gen.  v}.  7.  v.  1.  ix.  6.  xiv.  19.  xviii.  25.  But  at  what  time 
this  narration  was  committed  to  writing,  and  whether  it  has  been  re- 
duced to  the  form  in  which  we  now  have  it,  subsequently  to  the  time 
of  the  original  writer,  are  questions  which,  owing  to  the  silence  of  his- 
tory, cannot  now  be  determined. 

I.  It  seems,  however,  to  be  more  ancient  than  the  account  of  the  de- 
luge ;  for  it  contains  notliing  concerning  the  difference  between  clean 
and  unclean  animals,  nor  any  distinction  of  fowls  according  to  the  differ- 
ent formation  of  their  wings  and  claws,  both  which  are  found  in  that 
account :  and  the  division  of  animals  into  classes  is  different  in  the 
two  histories. [a] 

II.  As  to  its  matter,  it  appears  to  be  more  ancient  than  the  gene- 
alogy in  Gen.  v.,  and  the  law  against  homicides.  Gen.  ix.  6.,  for  in 
both  these  documents  the  image  of  God  in  man,  which  is  mentioned 
Gen.  i.  26.  s.,  is  again  referred  to. 

III.  Not  only  the  matter,  but  even  the  manner  seems  to  be  more 
ancient  than  Moses,  or  than  all  the  documents  which  Genesis  contains. 


214     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK       * 

For  1)  it  is  not  only  the  foundation  of  the  theology  of  the  whole  body  ■ 
but  2)  it  is  also  composed  in  a  language  labouring  under  a  scarcity 
of  words  ;  3)  every  thing  is  described  as  it  appears  and  strikes  the 
senses  ;  4)  it  does  not  reckon  days  from  evening  to  evening  as  Moses 
does,  but  by  evenings  and  mornings  ;  6)  it  makes  only  two  great 
divisions  of  animals  the  one  comprising  the  aquatic  and  aerial,  the 
other  the  terrestrial,  subdividing  the  terrestrial  into  cattle,  wild  beasts 
and  creeping  things  ;  all  which  is  different  from  the  arrangement 
adopted  by  Moses  ;  6)  it  is  totally  silent  concerning  unclean  animals  ; 
and,  lastly,  7)  that  part  which  relates  to  the  observance  of  the  Sab- 
bath is  cited  in  express  words  in  Ex.  xx.  8.  ss.  xxxi.  12 — 17,  and  is 
not  entirely  passed  over  in  Deut.  v.  12 — 14.  This  part  is  not  set 
aside  in  Ex.  xxxi.  13 — 17.  (comp.  Ezek.  xx.  12 — 20)  and  is  even 
casually  noticed  Gen.  vii.  4,  10.  viii.  10,  12.  xxix.  27.  s.[b] 

The  age  in  which  this  geogony  was  written,  may  in  some  measure 
be  conjectured,  from  its  being  entirely  directed  against  the  payment 
of  divine  honours  to  creatures.  To  this  error  mankind  in  the  first 
ages,  and  in  particular  our  first  parents  themselves,  must  have  strongly 
inclined ;  the  remedy,  therefore,  must  have  descended  from  those 
ages.  But  it  may  have  been  committed  to  writing  during  the  resi- 
dence of  the  Israelites  in  Egypt, [c]  where  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars, 
and  various  animals  and  plants,  being  worshipped,  and  the  existence 
of  the  supposed  evil  deity  Typhon  maintained,  it  was  probably  neces- 
sary carefully  to  warn  the  Israelites  against  these  errors  by  the  publi- 
cation of  this  document,  containing  a  fuller  exposition  of  the  ancient 
doctrine  respecting  the  divinity.  From  all  this  it  follows  that  this 
geogony,  which  is  the  groundwork  of  the  whole  theology  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  is  not,  as  some  suppose,  afc- 
tion,  since  the  creation  is  no  fiction :  nor  is  it  a  poetical  account  of  the 
creation,  for  nothing  poetic  occurs  in  it ;  nor,  lastly,  is  it  a  philosophi- 
cal speculation  of  some  ancient  sage,  since  a  document  of  this  kind 
far  surpasses  the  inventive  powers  of  the  wisest  men  of  all  antiquity, 
as  is  abundantly  proved  by  history.  It  is  therefore,  as  the  historical 
tenor  of  the  whole  narration  shows,  a  history.  But  as  no  witness 
existed  to  recount  the  particulars  of  the  creation  of  the  earth,  it  is 
evident  that  the  matter  of  this  history  must  have  been  derived  from 
divine  revelation,  given  for  the  purpose  of  instructing  the  first  of  the 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  215 

human  race,  in  the  manner  best  suited  to  their  capacities,  that  there  is 
no  divine  being  or  object  of  worship,  except  the  Creator  ;  and  that  all 
things  else  are  destined  for  the  use  of  man,  so  that  they  are  not  his  dir 
vinities,  but,  on  the  contrary,  he  their  lord.  The  peculiarities  of  the 
document  such  as  its  language,  and  the  enumeration  and  arrange- 
ment of  the  things  created,  are  undoubtedly  to  be  ascribed  to  the  un- 
known writer,  [d!] 

[a)  The  division  of  the  year  into  months  of  thirty  days,  which  appears 
in  th^  latter  account,  discovers  an  attempt  to  regulate  it  according  to  the 
course  of  the  sun  through  the  zodiac,  and  shows  some  knowledge  of  the 
planets,  which  in  thegeogony  are  incidentally  introduced  under  the  name 
of  stars.     TV .] 

[6)  Galder,  in  his  Versuche  iiber  die  Schopfungsgeschichte,  S.  63, 
rejects  Ex.  xx.  8.  ss.  and  xxxi.  12—17.,  because  in  Deut.  v.  12 — 16.,  Mo- 
ses mentions  another  design  of  the  Sabbath.  But  this  does  not  exclude 
the  other,  and  the  motive  was  particularly  adapted  to  the  state  of  the 
Israelites.  Besides,  in  other  cases  it  is  not  unusual  to  assign  several  mo- 
tives. Comp.  Ex.  xiii.  11 — 16.  with  Num.  iii.  40 — 51  ;  also  Gen.  ix.  4. 
with  Lev.  iii.  17.  xvii.  10  s.     See  Germ.  Introd.  pp.  136—139.] 

[c)  In  the  German  work  the  author  conjectures  the  time  of  its  compo- 
sition to  be  the  age  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  Seep.  141.  The  in- 
consistency of  this  with  the  supposition  advanced  in  the  text  is  obvious, 
and  is  sufficient  to  show  the  impracticability  and  uselessness  of  attempting 
to  discover  the  precise  period  when  the  portion  in  question,  and  similar 
ancient  documents,  were  committed  to  writing.  That  our  first  parents 
must  have  been  inclined  to  idolatry,  is  altogether  inconsistent  with  the 
circumstances  in  which  the  divine  historian  assures  us  they  were  placed  ; 
and  it  is  surprising  that  the  author  should  have  expressed  a  sentiment 
so  extraordinary.     TV.] 

[rf)  See  Horne's  Introd.  Vol.  IV.  p.  7.  ss.  ed.  2d.  and  his  references  ; 
particularly,  Holden  on  the  Fall.  c.  i.  and  ii.  pp.  I — 69.  Also  •jtorr  and 
Flatt's  Biblical  Theology,  translated  by  S.  S.  Schmucker,  A-  M.,  Vol.  1. 
pp.  359,  ss.     Tr.] 

§  21.     How  these  ancient  records  have  been  digested. 

The  character,  contents,  arrangement,  and  style  of  these  docu- 
ments everywhere  prove  that  their  collector  maintained  towards  them 
the  same  scrupulous  fidelity  which  had  preserved  them  until  his  time. 


216         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

I.  He  has  left  them  untouched,  as  is  evident,  not  only  from  the 
variety  of  style,  but  also  from  the  use  of  the  different  names  of  God, 
T\\7V,  DTISn,  and  dtiSn  T\'\'iV-,  in  the  different  documents,  and  from  the 

preservation  of  their  titles.  In  the  first  eleven  chapters,  the  docu 
ments  were  merely  arranged,  being  left  in  the  state  in  which  they  were 
found ;  in  the  rest  a  somewhat  closer  connexion  is  observable, 
although  the  style  still  varies,  especially  c.  xiv.  and  xxiii.  The  com- 
piler did  not  even  venture  to  remove  the  discrepancies  in  the  names 
of  Esau's  wives,  Gen.  xxvi.  34.  xxviii.  9.  xxxvi.  2.  s.  14,  25.  In 
the  history  of  Joseph,  the  style  is  uniform,  it  is  true,  but  it  is  by  no 

means  the  style  of  Moses,  [a] The  speeches,  which  are  recited, 

are  so  perfectly  congruous  with  the  characters  and  circumstances  of 
the  speakers,  that  it  is  impossible  they  should  have  been  retouched  : 
comp.   Gen.  xliii.  1 — 14.  xliv.  18 — 44.  xlv.  1 — 28. 

II.  Some  things,  indeed-  appear  to  have  been  omitted,  as  Gen.  ii.  4, 
where  the  title  promises  another  geogony,  yet  only  such  things  are  in- 
serted as  are  supplementary  to  the  first,  in  Gen.  i.  1. — ii.  3.  But 
there  is  no  sign  of  any  thing  having  been  added,  except  a  few  expla- 
nations of  obscure  words,  and  here  and  there  a  word  in  order  to  con- 
nect the  different  parts,  or  perhaps  some  passages  for  the  purpose  of 
supplying  the  more  recent  history  such  as  Gen.  xxxvi.  31 — 39,  43., 
unless  this  passage  be  a  modern  addition. The  doctrine  con- 
cerning the  true  God  contained  in  these  documents  is  so  intimately 
interwoven  with  the  whole  of  their  contents,  that  it  cannot  have  been 
inserted  at  any  period  subsequent  to  their  origin. 

III.  Now  and  then  two  documents  coalesce  in  one  narration  :  the 
fifth  chapter  of  Genesis  is  inserted  in  the  middle  of  the  document  con- 
tained in  Gen.  iv.  1 — 26  and  vi.  1 — 6  ;  Gen.  iv.  26,  being  closely 
connected  with  vi.  1 .  So  also  in  the  history  of  the  deluge  two  docu- 
ments are  united  ;  which  the  repetitions  of  the  same  thing,  the  varia- 
tion in  the  style,  and  the  use  of  different  names  for  the  Deity,  con- 
spire to  prove. 

IV.  That  nothing  has  been  arbitrarily  altered  is  plain,  not  only  from 
the  representation  of  the  characters  of  the  several  persons  in  the  his- 
tory, which  are  always  consistent,  natural,  and  never  exaggerated, 
but  also  from  the  fact  that  conduct  dishonourable  to  the  patriarchs  is 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  217 

candidly  related;  Gen.  ix.  18—27.  xii.  11—20.  xx.  1 — 18.  xiii. 
6—11.  xix.  31—38.  xxvii.  5—29.  xxx.  37—42.  xxxiv.  25—29. 
xxxvii.  18 — 28.  xxxviii.  7 — 27.  &c. 

That  it  was  Moses  who  coUectedj  these  records,  has  been  ah*eady 
shown,  {  9. 

[a)  In  his  larger  work  (S.  147)  the  author  conjectures  that  it  may  have 
been  written  by  one  of  Jacob's  sons  or  grandsons,  although  he  allows  that 
occasionally  Moses  may  have  added  a^word  to  illustrate  an  antiquated  ex- 
pression. Tr.] 

§  22.     The  publication  of  the  Pentateuch. 

That  Moses  kept  a  record  of  his  transactions,  is  plain  from  Ex. 
xvii.  14.  xxxiv.  27.  Num.  xxxiii.  1.  s.,  and  that  he  published  some 
parts  of  this  record  almost  as  soon  as  the  facts  took  place,  maybe  in« 
ferred  from  Exod.  xxiv.  7.  The  accurate  description  of  the  utensils 
for  divine  worsliip,  also,  which  is  drawn'up  in  the  form  of  a  state  pa- 
per, Ex.  XXV.  1 — xxxi.  18.,  and  without  which  in  the  form  of  a  written 
document,  the  artificers  could  not  have  fulfilled  the  task  assigned 

them ; the  list  of  the  parts  of  the  tabernacle  as  received,  when 

completed,  Ex.  xxxvi.  1 — xl.  33.;  the  census  of  the  people,  the  ac- 
counts of  the  gifts  of  the  prmces,  and  the  description  of  the  encamp- 
ments and  of  the  order  of  the  tribes.  Num.  i.  1 — iv.  49.  vii.  1 — 88. 
xxvi.  1 — 65,,  all  likewise  in  the  form  of  public  documents  ; — tend  to 
confirm  this  conclusion.  By  adopting  these  parts,  and  perhaps  some 
others  written  originally  by  secretaries,  Moses  incorporated  them 
into  his  writings,  and  made  them  his  own.  In  the  same  manner,  the 
directions  given  to  the  priests  must  have  been  immediately  committed 
to  writing  for  their  use,  and  thus,  in  a  certain  sense,  published.  In 
his  last  years,  Moses,  induced  by  his  earnest  soUcitude  for  the  instruc- 
tion of  future  ages,  arranged  all  his  notes  of  past  transactions,  and 
added  some  things,  and  transposed  others  to  more  convenient  places  : 
as,  for  example,  the  laws  respecting  the  feast  of  the  passover,  which 
are  placed  consecutively  with  the  history  of  the  origin  of  that  institu- 
tion, Ex.  xii.  14 — 20,  and  that  respecting  the  preservation  of  the  man- 
na m  the  tabernacle,  subjoined  immediately  to  the  account  of  its 

first  donation.  Ex.  xvi.  32 — 34. Deuteronomy  he  did  not  finish 

28 


218    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

until  the  fortieth  year  of  the  wanderings  of  the  Israelites  ;  for  he  fre- 
quently mentions  the  victory  which  they  had  obtained  in  that  year 
over  Sihon  and  Og,  Deut  i.  4.  ii.  14 — iii.  19.  iv.  1 — 4,  46 — 49.,  and 
often  deplores  his  want  of  faith  at  the  waters  of  Meribah ;  Num. 
XX.  7—13.  comp.  t)eut.  i.  37.  iii.  23—29.  iv.  21.  s.  xxxi.  2.  He 
published  the  whole  work  a  little  before  his  death,  when  he  commit- 
ted it  to  the  priests  and  heads  of  the  people,  to  be  kept  in  the  holy 
place  of  the  tabernacle  with  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  Deut.  xxxi. 

9 — 13.  24 — 26. It  is  not  to  be  supposed,  however,  that  in  this 

publication  these  writings  were  in  every  part  reduced  to  exact  order, 
and  thus  digested  into  one  volume.  They  doubtless  formed  several 
volumes  which  collectively  went  under  the  title  of  Th£  Law,  The 
Law  of  Jehovah,  and  The  Book  of  the  Law  of  Moses. 

1.  The  division  of  the  writings  of  Moses  into  five  books,  first  men- 
tioned by  Flavius  Josephus,  would  seem  to  have  been  made  after  the 
captivity,  when  the  reading  of  the  Pentateuch  in  the  Synagogues  was 
commenced.  Hence  it  is  observed  even  in  the  Alexandrine  version.  In 
the  Old  Testament  these  writings  are  constantly  designated  by  names  in 
the  singular  number.[a] 

2.  Although  the  text  of  the  Pentateuch  has  been  remarkably  well  pre- 
served, and  although  we  possess  many  manuscripts  of  it,  and  some  very  an- 
cient, still  the  use  of  critical  conjecture  is  not  to  be  rejected.  In  the  pre- 
ceding remarks  several  passages  have  been  supposed  to  be  interpolated. 

[a)  From  this  division  into  five  books  the  generic  name  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, (Pentateuchus,  IlgvraTSujfOf ,  either  by  ellipsis  for  v)  tUSvTaTSuj^og 
^iSXog,  or  as  a  compound  term  derived  from  -sssvrs,  Jive,  and  TSv)(ps, 
a  book,  and  the  Jewish  appellation  min  ""B^Dun  niS'Dn  (literally,  the 

five  fifths  of  the  law,  Buxt.  Lex.  Chal.  et  Tal.  col.  791,)  are  plainly  deri- 
ved. It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  the  names  by  which  the  first  three 
and  last  books  are  designated  in  the  English  translation,  were  adopted 
from  the  Greek  versions,  being  Greek  words  expressive  of  the  contents 
of  the  books  to  which  they  are  respectively  attached :  Genesis,  Ffivstfiff, 
Creation ;  Exodus,  E|oi5og,  Departure ;  Leviticus,  Asuitixov,  relating 
to  the  Levites ;  Deuteronomy,  Asurspovojuio^,  the  second  Law.  The 
fourth  book,  Numbers,  (in  the  Greek  versions  ApiVoi,)  is  so  called 
from  its  containing  accounts  of  the  numbering  of  the  Israelites.  The 
-Tews  dcsi?rnate  the  several  books  by  the  words  with  which  they  respect- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT-  219 

ively  commence :  Genesis,  N^a  niyxi^  ;  Exodus,  niDty  n^NI  or  simply 
niDiy  ;  Leviticus,  KIDM  ;  Numbers,  laTil,  and  sometimes  12nD3,  which 
is  the  fifth  word  in  the  book,  and  expresses  the  place  in  which  all  the 
transactions  related  therein  occur,  in  the  desert ;  Deuteronomy,  n /X 
D'"13in,  or  simply  D'^^^,  and  sometimes  HJtJ'O,  (repetition^  from  its 
containing  a  repetition  of  part  of  the  contents  of  the  preceding^ 
books.     TV.] 


*v 


220  PARTICULAU  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOli 


CHAPTER  II. 


OF   THE   BOOK   OF   JOSHTA, 


§  23.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Josliua. 

The  book  of  Joshua  narrates  the  events  subsequent  to  Uie  death 
of  Moses,  as  follows  : — The  exploring  of  Jericho  by  the  spies,  the 
passage  of  the  people  across  the  river  Jordan,  the  circumcision  of 
those  who  on  account  of  the  inconveniencies  attending  the  journey 
through  Arabia  had  not  yet  submitted  to  that  rite,  the  celebration  of 
the  first  passover  in  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  the  capture  and  total 

destruction  of  Jericho,  occupy  c.  i — vi. The  assault  upon  Ai  is 

repulsed,  and  the  people  are  much  dejected  on  that  account,  when 
the  sacrilege  of  Achan  being  discovered  by  casting  lots,  he  is  stoned> 
and  Ai  is  taken  ;  and  then  the  command  contained  in  Deut.  xxvii.  is 
at  last  fulfilled  :  c.  vii.  viii. A  treaty  of  alhance,  fi-audulently  ob- 
tained by  the  Gibeonites,  leads  to  further  battles  ;  for  these  new 
allies  being  threatened  with  war  by  the  king  of  Jebus  or  Jerusalem, 
and  the  other  kings  of  the  southern  Canaanites,  Joshua  affords  them 
assistance,  and  conquers  nearly  all  the  southern  part  of  Canaan. 
Not  long  after  he  anticipates  the  warlike  preparations  of  the  remain- 
ing kings  of  Canaan,  and  defeats  them  with  immense  slaughter,  thus 

acquiring  almost  all  the  northern  part  of  Canaan  :  c.  ix — xii. In 

the  7th  or  8th  year  after  the  invasion,  the  country  is  surveyed,  and 
divided  by  lot  among  the  tribes,  on  which  occasion  the  division  of 
the  district  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  is  repeated.  The  cities  of 
refuge  are  designated,  and  those  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan  again 
mentioned.  Forty-eight  cities  are  set  apart  for  the  Levites,  thirteen 
of  the  number,  situated  in  the  southern  part  of  the  country,  beiing 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  221  , 

appropriated  to  the  priests  :  c.  xiii— xxii. The  book  ends  with  an 

account  of  two  public  assembhes,  and   of  the  death  of  Joshua : 
c.  xxiii.  xxiv.  [a] 

[d)  The  contents  of  this  book  naturally  divide  themselves  into  three 
parts  :  the  history  of  the  conquest  by  Joshua,  c.  i — xii :  the  account  of 
the  partition  of  the  land,  c.  xiii — xxii :  and  the  history  of  the  close  of 
Joshua's  administration,  c.  xxiii.  xxiv.     TV.] 

§  24.     The  Design  of  the  Author. 

From  the  preceding  exhibition  of  the  contents,  it  is  evident  that  the 
author  intended  to  show  his  readers  the  manner  in  which  the  promi- 
ses of  the  possession  of  Canaan,  so  often  made  to  the  Patriarchs, 
were  ultimately  fulfilled,  and  the  portion  which  was  allotted  to  each 
tribe.  With  this  view  he  repeats  the  history  of  the  conquest  and 
partition  of  the  country  beyond  Jordan,  c.  xii.  1 — 6.  xiii.  7 — 33. 
XX.  8,  although  it  had  taken  place  before.  He  does  not  notice  any 
subsequent  alteration  of  the  division  ;  for  the  conquest  of  the  cities 
Hebron  and  Debir  by  Caleb,  mentioned  in  c.  xv.  13 — 19,  took  place 
under  Joshua,  and  is  introduced  in  Judg.  i.  10 — 15,  20.,  only  as  a 
retrospective  notice  of  an  event  of  a  preceding  age.  [a]  What  is  said 
of  the  tribes  of  Judah,  Ephraim,  and  Manasseh,  Josh.  xv.  63.  xvi.  10. 
xvii.  12.  s.,  does  not  prove  that  the  book  is  of  recent  origin  ;  although, 
as  the  passages  are  not  connected  with  the  series  of  the  narration, 
they  may  possibly  be  interpolations.  Lastly,  the  places,  c.  xv.  9. 
xviii.  25.,  in  which  Kirjath-jearim  is  ascribed  to  the  tribe  of  Judali, 
and  Gibeon,  Beeroth,  and  Kephira  to  that  of  Benjamin,  although 
they  were  cities  of  the  Gibeonites,  have  no  relation  to  the  transac- 
tion mentioned  H  Sam.  iv.  2,  and  xxi.  1 — 6,  for  Gibeon  was  after- 
wards given  (Josh.  xxi.  17,)  to  the  priests:  whence  it  is  evident  that 
these  cities  were  left  in  possession  of  the  Gibeonites,  who  were  ser- 
vants of  the  sanctuary,  and  merely  subjected  to  the  jurisdiction  of 
the  tribes  to  which  they  are  ascribed,  [i] 

[a)  In  the  7th  or  8th  year  after  the  invasion  of  Canaan,  Caleb  was 
eighty-five  years  old  (Josh.  xiv.  7,  10.)  and  certainly  after  Joshua's 
death,  when  he  must  have  been  ninety-five  or  ninety-six,  he  aouid  not 
have  undertaken  any  such  warlike  enterprises.]  v.; 


;.-$.^W»^ 


222    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[b)  This  section  is  of  peculiar  importance,  as  by  giving  a  clear  and 
consistent  view  of  the  design  of  the  writer  of  the  book,  it  removes  most 
of  the  objections  brought  by  De  Wette  (Einleit.  J  166,  167.)  and 
others  against  its  authenticity  and  credibility.     TV.] 

§  25.     Whether  Joshua  was  the  Author  of  this  hook. 

Inasmuch  as  the  language  is  not  only  free  from  recent  or  Chaldee 
words,  but  is  also  very  similar  to  that  of  the  Pentateuch,  some  have 
thought  that  this  book  is  the  production  of  Joshua  himself,  and  have 
endeavoured  to  support  their  opinion  by  the  following  arguments. 
1)  Joshua  is  said,  c.  xxiv.  26.  to  have  annexed  the  things  there 
treated  of  to  the  book  of  the  law,  whence  it  would  seem  that  the 
book  of  Joshua  is  a  sort  of  continuation  of  Deuteronomy,  the  last 
two  chapters  of  which  seem  to  have  been  likewise  added  by  Joshua. 

But  Josh.  xxiv.  26.  does  not  relate  to  the  whole  book,  but  solely 

to  the  renewal  of  the  covenant  with  God  which  Joshua  had  made. 

and  of  which  he  had  erected  a  monument. 2)  In  the  account  of 

the  death  and  burial  of  Joshua,  c.  xxiv.  29.  ss.,  a  difference  of  style 
may  be  perceived,  similar  to  that  which  is  observable  in  the  narration 
of  the  death  and  burial  of  Moses,  Deut.  xxxiii.  xxxiv. ;  and  Joshua 
in  the  former  passage,  as  Moses  in  the  latter,  is  called  tlie  servant  of 
God,  while  before  he  is  merely  designated  by  his  proper  name,  a  dif- 
ference which  proves  that  the  whole  accoimt  has  been  added  by 

another  hand. 3)  The  author  intimates  that  he  participated  in 

the  transactions  which  he  records,  c.  v.   1 .  [a] 4)  The  whole 

book  breathes  the  spirit  of  the  laws  of  Moses,  a  character  which 

peculiarly  suits  Joshua,  the  personal  attendant  of  Moses.  [6] 

Although  these  three  last  arguments  are  by  no  means  contemptible, 
yet  it  will  be  seen  from  other  considerations,  that  the  book,  at 
least  as  it  is  now  arranged,  is  not  coeval  with  the  events  which 
it  narrates,  [c] 

[a)  In  answer  to  this  argument,  it  may  be  said  that  the  first  persou 
plural,  on  the  use  of  which  it  is  founded,  frequently  embraces  all  those 
who  are  of  the  same  nation  or  religion  as  the  author  or  speaker,  or  as 
his  readers  or  hearers,  and  is  sometimes  extended  in  this  way  even  to  the 
remote  predecessors  of  either.  See  Storr  on  the  Historic  Sense,  note 
183,  Opuscula,  Tom.  I.  p,  75,  (p.  79  of  Gibbs'  Trans.)     In  addition  to 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  223 

this,  the  supposition  of  this  passage  being  part  of  an  ancient  document, 
(see  }  29.  p.  228,)  effectually  destroys  the  force  of  the  argument  drawn 
from  it.  De  Wette  gets  over  it  in  a  summary  way ;  "  The  miraculous 
stories  in  the  book  entirely  exclude  the  possibility  of  its  being  written  by 
an  eye-witness,"  the  passage  is  therefore  an  interpolation  I     Tr.] 

[6)  See  c.  vi  17.  ss.  vii.  6.  ss.  xxii.  1.  ss.  xxiii.  xxiv.  2 — 28  ;  also  the 
references  to  the  commands,  promises,  threatenings,  and  in  general  to  the 
•works  of  Moses,  which  continually  occur.  Comp.  i.  7,  8,  13,  14,  15,  17. 
iii.  3,  6,  7,  8,  11,  17.  iv.  10,  14,  2T.  vi.  17.  ss.  viii.  30.  ss.  ix.  21—27.  xi. 
6,  9,  12,  15,  20,  23.  xii.  6.  xiii.  8,  12,  24,  29,  32.  xiv.  6,  7,  9,  12.  xvii.  4. 
xviii.  1,  6,  7.  xix.  50.  xx.  1 — 9.  xxi.  2,  3,  8.  xxii.  5,  8,  9.  xxiii.  6,  7, 
11.  ss.  15,  16.  xxiv.  5—13.] 

[This  argument  is  sufficient  to  prove  the  antiquity  of  the  matter  of  the 
book,  and  even  to  render  it  probable  that  great  part  of  it  was  originally 
written  by  Joshua  himself;  but  it  is  of  no  force  against  the  hypothesis  of 
the  compilation  of  the  book  from  ancient  documents.    See  J  28.     TV  ] 

[c)  In  addition  to  the  arguments  adduced  by  Jahn,  Jewish  tradition 
may  be  mentioned,  which,  in  general,  is  in  favour  of  Joshtia's  being  ihe 
author  of  the  book.  Htet,  Demonstratio  Evangelica,  Prop.  IV.  ii. 
This  tradition  must  be  admitted  unless  the  work  itself  can  be  shown  to 
contain  internal  evidence  aganist  it.    Comp.  {  26.     TV.] 

§  26.     This  Book  is  more  recent  than  the  time  of  Joshua. 

Those  who  maintain  that  the  book  is  much  more  modern  than  the 
age  of  Joshua  adduce  many  arguments  which  are  nothing  to  the  pur- 
pose, as  has  been  shewn  in  the  Germ.  Introd.  T.  II.  Sect.  I.  §  26.  S. 
161 — 164. [a]  There  are,  however,  reasons  sufficient  to  warrant  the 
conclusion  that  it  is  somewhat  more  recent  than  that  age. 

I.  We  read,  Josh.  xv.  63.,  that  individuals  of  the  tribe  of  Judah  inha- 
bited Jerusalem  together  with  the  Jebusites,  whom  the  tribe  of  Judah 
had  not  been  able  to  expel  Now  this  union  of  the  children  of  Judah 
with  the  Jebusites  in  Jerusalem  did  not  take  place  until  the  conquest 
of  that  city  after  the  death  of  Joshua ;  for  at  that  time  some  of  the 
tribe  of  Judah  fixed  their  residence  there,  while  the  Jebusites,  coming 
down  from  the  citadel  of  Zion  which  had  remained  uninjured,  took 
possession  of  dwellings  for  themselves.  This  alone,  indeed,  would  not 
completely  prove  that  the  book  was  written  after  the  death  of  Joshua, 
because  what  is  related  in  Judg.  i.  8.,  as  if  occurring  after  the  death 
of  Joshua,  might  be  taken  from  the  narrative  of  Joshua  himself 


224    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

But,  11.  in  Josh.  x.  12 — 15.,  a  poem  is  quoted  from  the  book  of  Jasher 
(la'Ti  13D  or  rather  I'tyn  13D,  the  book  of  songs)  in  evidence  of  the 

defeat  of  the  southern  Canaanites  ;  which  testimony  concerning  tran- 
sactions which  must  have  been  notorious  to  all  in  the  age  in  which 
they  occurred,  would  not  have  been  needed  by  Joshua  or  any  other 
contemporary  author,  and  could  only  have  been  used  by  some  writer 
of  a  more  recent  age.   '  .    , 

[a)  The  argnments  are  these:  1)  the  use  of  the  phrase  "  to  this  Jay,"' 
(iv.  9.  V.  9.  vi.  25.  vii.  26.  viii.  28,  29.  ix.  27.  x.  27.  xv.  63.  xvi.  10.): 
but  this  does  not  presume  a  very  considerable  length  of  time,  and  may 
have  been  added  by  Joshua  towards  the  close  of  his  life.  2)  The  remark 
that  Debir  was  formerly  called  Krjath-Sepher;  Hebron,  Kirjath-Arba; 
Kirjath-Jearim,  Kirjath-Baal :  but  these  may  certainly  have  been  made 
by  Joshua,  since  even  a  third  name  in  current  use  is  attributed  to  Debir 
in  c.  XV.  49.  3)  The  mention  of  '  the  strong  city  Tyre'  c.  xix.  29.:  but 
this  is  not  the  celebrated  city  of  that  name,  but  an  inland  fortified  place.* 
4)  The  mention  of  CabuU  c.  x.  27.:  but  this  is  not  the  country  to  which 
that  name  was  applied  by  Hiram  in  Solomon's  time,  but  a  city  which  in 
tlie  age  of  Josephus  had  degenerated  into  a  village. t  5)  The  use  of  the 
word  Lms,  c.  xvi.  2  :  but  this  does  not  designate  the  same  place  which, 
after  Joshua's  time,  was  built  in  the  land  of  the  Hittites ;  see  Judg.  i. 
26.  6)  The  use  of  the  word  Jerusalem  applied  to  Jebus  but  it  cannot 
be  proved  that  this  use  was  not  earlier  than  the  time  of  David,  and  the 
name  may  properly  have  been  applied  to  that  city  before.  7)  The  use  of 
the  expression  '  house  of  God,'  c.  xi.  16.:  but  this  is  by  no  means  exclu- 
sively applicable  in  historical  style  to  the  temple,  but  may  well  be  used 
of  the  holy  tabernacle,  as  the  Bedouins  apply  the  term  house  to  the 
greater  tent  which  has  three  divisions.  See  also  Ex.  xxiii.  19.  Deut. 
xxiii.  18.  Mat.  xii.  4.  and  the  parallel  places.  8)  The  introduction  of 
the  book  of  Jasher:  but  this  book,  although  mentioned  in  II  Sam.  i.  18., 
may  have  been  a  collection  of  poems,  enriched  from  time  to  time  with 
various  additions. Comp.  '^  27.] 

§  27.     The  age  of  the  Book  of  Joshua. 

That  this  book  was  written  before  the  seventh  year  of  the  reign  of 
David,  is  certain  from  c.  xv.  63.,  where  it  is  stated  that  the  tribe  of 
Judah  would  not  expel  the  Jebusites  from  Jerusalem,  and  that  on  this 

*  [BocHARTi  Canaan.  Lib.  II.  c.  xvii.  c.  776.  Opp.  Lugd.  1692.J 
'  [Reiandi  Palaestina  Illustrata,  p.  701.  J 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  225 

count  the  latter  inhabited  the  city  together  with  the  former,  while 
nothing  is  said  of  the  capture  of  the  citadel  of  Zion  by  David,  who  in 
contempt  of  his  weak  and  impotent  enemies  refrained  from  expelling 
them.  That  <  the  mountains  of  Judah  and  Israel'  are  spoken  of,  c. 
xi.  16,  21.,  is  no  proof  of  a  more  recent  origin,  for  these  terms  had 
been  employed  in  contradistinction  to  each  other  not  only  during  the 
first  years  of  the  reign  of  David,  but  even  at  an  earlier  period,  and 
this  use  arose  from  the  fact  that  Judah  received  the  right  of  primo- 
geniture from  his  father,  (Gen.  xlix.  8 — 10).  Hence  also,  in  other 
places,  antecedently  to  the  division  of  the  nation,  Judah  is  distinguished 
from  Israel,  and  is  set  in  opposition  to  the  tribe  of  Ephraim  or  Joseph, 
which  obtained  the  second  privilege  of  primogeniture  ;   Judg.  i.  1.  s. 

XX.  18.   I  Sam.  xi.  8.  xv.  4. Besides,  if  the  book  of  Judges  was 

written  not  later  than  the  seventh  year  of  David,  or,  as  will  be  subse- 
quently shown,  not  later  than  the  first  years  of  the  reign  of  Saul,  it 
follows  that  the  book  of  Joshua  must  have  been  written  before  that 
time  ;  for  the  author  of  the  book  of  Judges  certainly  knew  of  the  pub- 
hcation  of  the  book  of  Joshua,  since,  c.  i.  1.  ii.  6,  8.,  he  commences 
his  narrative  with  Joshua's  death,  with  which  the  book  of  Joshua 
ends,  whereas,  if  that  book  had  not  been  in  existence,  it  would  have 
been  more  agreeable  to  his  design  to  have  commenced  with  the  occu- 
pation and  partition  of  Canaan. On  these  grounds,  therefore,  it 

may  certainly  be  inferred  that  the  book  of  Joshua  was  composed  be- 
fore the  first  years  of  Saul's  government ;  its  exact  age,  however,  and 
who  was  its  author,  cannot  be  determined.  It  has  received  its  name 
from  the  transactions  of  Joshua  which  it  records,  [a]  See  the  Synop- 
sis ascribed  to  Athanasius,  and  Theodoretus. 

The  Samaritans  have  chosen  rather  to  invent  two  new  books  of  Joshua 
for  themselves  than  to  receive  the  genuine  work  from  the  Jews.  Their 
first  book  begins  at  the  death  of  Moses,  and  ends  with  Alexander  Severus. 
See  the  Appendix  to  Hottingeri  Exercitationes  Antimorinianae, 
Tiguri.  1644.    Scaliger  deposited  in  the  library  at  Leyden  a  copy  of  this 

book  written  in  Arabic  with  Samaritan  letters. The  second  begins 

with  Adam  and  ends  with  the  year  of  the  Hegira  898.  i.  e.  A.  D.  1492: 
its  author  was  Abulphatach.  See  Saraaritanischer  Briefwechsel  in 
Eichhorns.  Repert.  fiir  Bibl.  und  Morgen.  Litt.  IX.  Th.  S.  1—46.  Also 
Neues  Repert.  fiir  Bibl.  und  Morg.  Lit.  von  Paulus.  I.  Th.  S.  117— 
159.[61 


226         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

[a)  Or  more  probably  from  the  Jewish  tradition  that  Joshua  was  its 
author ;  for  the  foundation  for  which,  see  }  28.  and  ^  29.  note  a.)  Tr.^ 

[A)  A  more  extended  notice  of  these  spurious  books  may  be  found  in  De 
Wette's  Einleit.  J  171,  where  it  is  shown  that  they  are  both  derived 
from  the  canonical  book,  which  has  been  re-written,  mixed  up  with  fabu- 
lous stories  and  exaggerations  of  the  true  history,  and  continued  down  to 
the  above  mentioned  periods.  7VJ 

§  28.     The  Book  of  Joshua  has  been  formed  from  ancient  documents. 

That  the  book  of  Joshua  has  been  formed  fi-om  ancient  documents 
coeval  with  the  events  narrated,  is  evident  from  the  following  consi- 
derations.— 1)  The  example  of  Moses  in  committing  the  transactions 
of  the  day  to  writing,  would  authorize  the  expectation  that  in  the  im- 
mediately subsequent  age  a  history  of  the  most  important  events  by 
which  the  promises  made  to  the  patriarchs  were  fulfilled,  would  be 
written  ;  especially  as  a  written  record  of  the  boundaries  of  the  seve- 
ral tribes  was  necessary  to  prevent  those  disputes  and  wars  which 
would  otherwise  have  arisen  in  the  course  of  time. — 2)  We  have  expli- 
cit evidence  of  the  fact :  for  we  read,  c.  xviii.,  that  Joshua  caused 
a  geographical  description  of  the  country  to  be  prepared,  and  the 
author  informs  us,  c.  xxiv.  25.,  that  Joshua  committed  to  writing  an 
account  of  the  renewal  of  the  covenant  between  the  Israelites  and  God. 
From  these  instances  we  may  reasonably  infer  that  the  other  remarka- 
ble events  of  the  age  were  in  like  manner  preserved  in  coeval  re- 
cords.— 3)  Without  the  aid  of  authentic  and  coeval  records  the  author 
could  not  have  given  such  minute  descriptions  of  the  boundaries  of 
the  several  tribes ;  he  could  not  have  adapted  his  accounts  of  the 

speeches  of  Caleb,  c.  xiv.  6 — 12., of  Phineas,  c.  xxii.  18 — 20. 

of  the  tribes  beyond  Jordan,  c.  xxii.  21 — 30, — and  of  Joshua 

himself,  c.  xxiii.  xxiv, with  such  remarkable  accuracy  to  the  cha- 
racters of  each  respectively  ;  nor  could  he  have  drawn  up  the  whole 
of  his  work  in  such  a  manner  that  everywhere  it  should  breathe  the 
spirit  of  the  Mosaic  law.  Lastly,  unless  he  had  borrowed  from  an 
ancient  document,  he  would  not  have  spoken,  c,  v.  1.,  as  if  he  had 
been  a  party  in  the  transactions  he  was  recording,  nor  would  he  have 
said  that  the  harlot  Rahab  lived  among  the  Israelites  '  even  unto  this 
day,'  without  mentioning  her  marriage  with  Salmon,  son  of  Naasson. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  227 

a  prince  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  All  these  things  prove  that  the  re- 
cords whence  this  book  has  been  compiled,  were  coeval  with  the 
events  which  they  narrate. — 4)  The  author  of  the  book  himself  cites 
in  express  terms  a  book  of  poems,  Josh.  x.  13.  [a] 

From  the  frequent  occurrence  of  the  phrase,  "  in  the  land  of  Ca- 
naan "  (e.  g.  c.  xxi.  2.  xxii.  9 — 11,  32.),  it  would  seem  probable  that 
the  author  of  the  ancient  documents  used  in  the  compilation  of  the  book 
was  a  genealogist,  or  an  eminent  Levite,  resident  beyond  Jordan.* 
This  is  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  he  enters  minutely  into  the  his- 
tory of  the  altar  erected  in  Gilead  (c.  xxi.  9 — 24),  and  that  he  relates 
the  speeches  of  Phineas  and  of  the  tribes  beyond  Jordan  at  some 
length,  as  though  he  had  been  present  at  their  delivery  ;  while  on  the 
contrary  he  is  brief  in  his  narration  of  the  report  of  Phineas  to  the 
assembled  tribes  in  Canaan.  As  the  discourses  of  Joshua  (c.  xxiii. 
xxiv.)  are  given  very  considerably  in  detail,  we  may  infer  that  the 
author  was  himself  present  at  that  assembly  of  the  people.  From 
all  this  it  is  plain,  that  the  phrase  '<  in  the  land  of  Canaan,"  affords  no 
ground  for  the  conclusion  that  the  author  of  the  book  of  Joshua  was  an 
exile  in  the  Babylonish  captivity  ;  since  it  is  with  the  author  of  the 
contemporary  documents,  and  not  with  the  compiler  of  the  book,  that 
the  phrase  originated.  [&] 

[a)  To  these  proofs  may  be  added : — 5)  The  absence  of  any  traces  of 
disputes  or  civil  wars  among  the  tribes  concerning  their  respective 
boundaries.  Some  document  of  acknowledged  authority,  accurately 
settling  the  bounds  of  the  several  tribes,  must  have  existed  from  the 
very  partition,  by  reference  to  which  disputes  of  this  kind  might  be  set- 
tled, or  the  peaceful  state  of  the  growing  tribes  would  have  been  entirely 
without  any  example  in  the  history  of  mankind. 6)  Without  the  ex- 
istence of  contemporaneous  and  authoritative  records,  the  allotment  of 
thirteen  cities  to  the  priests  (c.  xxi.  13 — 19,)  would  have  been  nugatory. 
Aaron's  family  could  not  have  been,  at  the  time  of  the  allotment,  suffi- 
ciently numerous  to  occupy  those  cities.  But  it  is  altogether  unlikely 
that  these  with  the  adjoining  lands  were  left  entirely  unoccupied  in  ex- 
pectation of  their  future  owners.  To  afford  security,  therefore,  to  the 
sacerdotal  family  for  their  legitimate  rights,  when  they  should  be  in  a 
condition  to  claim  them,  some  document  contemporaneous  with  the  ap- 
propriation must  have  existed.    Without  such  a  document,  innumerable 

*  fBntsee  ^29.  notft  a).  7V.] 


228    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

disputes   must  have   arisen  whenever  they  attempted   to  claim  their 
possessions.     Comp.  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  ^  446  viert.  Aus.     TrJ] 

[b)  As  a  mere  conjecture,  the  opinion  of  De  Wette  respecting  the 
number  of  the  original  documents  appears  probable.  He  supposes  c. 
i — xi.  to  be  one  entire  ancient  record,  xi.  23.  being  a  formal  conclusion; 
c.  xii.  to  be  a  later  document,  intended  principally  for  a  summary  of  the 
first,  but  containing  additional  particulars,  (v.  14,  15,  16,  17,  21,  22,  23, 
24.);  and  c.  xiii — xxiv.  to  be  another  document,  with  the  insertion  of  a 
smaller  record,  c.  xv.  20—63.  Einleit.  J  168.  Bertholdt,  S-  850.  flf., 
carries  his  conjectures  much  further,  and  of  course  diverges  more  from 
the  bounds  of  probability.     TV.] 

§  29.     The  Book  of  Joshua  is  worthy  of  credit. 
That  the  author  has  made  his  extracts  from  the  documents  which 
he  used  with  scrupulous  fidehty,  and  is  therefore  worthy  of  credit, 
appears  from  indubitable  proofs. 

I.    The  speeches  of  Rahab,  of  Caleb,  of  Phineas-   of  the   tribes 
beyond  Jordan,  and  of  Joshua,  all  of  which  exactly  suit  the  charac- 
ters of  the  respective  speakers,  have  been  copied  by  the  author  from 
his  records  word  for  word  ;  and  in  other  parts  of  his  history  he  has 
been,  as  is  usual  with  Oriental  historians,  so  tenacious  of  the  original 
language  as  to  retain  the  expressions,  "  until  we  were  passed  over," 
c.  V.  1.,  and,  "  she  dweUeth  in  Israel  even  unto  this  day,"  c,  vi.  25. 
Hence  it  happens  also  that  he  does  not  mention  the  tribes  in  geographi- 
cal order,  but  in  the  order  in  which  they  followed  in  his  original  re- 
cord, that,  namely,  in  which  they  severally  by  lot  received  their  por- 
tion of  the  territory.  Josh.  xv.  xvi.  and  xviii.  xix.      He  uses  also 
many  words  and  phrases  which  occur  in  the  Pentateuch,  but  seldom 
or  never  in  any  of  the  subsequent  books,  and  some  others  which  are 
common  in  the  more   recent  books  are  not  to  be  found  in  this. 
Lastly,  he  mentions  Joshua  without  any  honorary  distinction,  just  as 
he  had  found  him  mentioned  in  his  documents,  [a]  until  the  time  of 
his  death,  when  he  is  called  '^  the  servant  of  Jehovah,"  xxiv.  29. 
He  has  not  even  ventured  to  add  in  xvii.  13.  that  the  Israelites  were 
afterwards  seduced  to  idolatry  by  the  Canaanites  whom  they  had  suf- 
fered to  remain  as  tributaries  :  whence  it  is  plain  that  the  original 
document  was  written  before  the  apostasy  of  the  Israelites. 

II.  This  book  was  received  by  the  Hebrews  as  soon  as 'published, 
while  the  original  documents  were  yet  extant,  and  afforded  a  suffi- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  229 

cient  standard  by  which  to  judge  of  the  credit  of  the  author  ;  and 
since  it  contains  an  account  of  the  boundaries  of  the  tribes  and  of 
their  cities,  the  people  were  too  much  interested  in  its  contents  not 
to  ascertain  whether  it  corresponded  with  those  documents. 

III.  The  events  related  in  it  were  also  well  known,  as  appears 
from  the  reference  made  by  Asaph  to  the  conquest  and  partition  of 

the  country,  in  Ps.  Ixxviii.  53 — 65.  comp.  Ps.  xliv.  2 — 4  ; to  the 

destruction  of  the  Canaanites,  by  a  contemporary  of  David,[6]  in 

Ps.  Ixviii.  13 — 16  ; to  the  stoppage  of  the  waters  of  Jordan,  in 

Ps.  cxiv.  1 — 6.  Ixvi.  6.  s.  Hab.  iii.  8  ; to  the  tempest  which  fol- 
lowed the  destruction  of  the  Canaanites,  in  Hab.  iii.  1 1 — 16  ;  and  to 
the  tabernacle  at  Shiloh,  in  Judg.  xviii.  31.  xx.  1,  18,  26.  I  Sam. 
i.  3,  9,  24.  iii.  21.  iv.  12. 

IV.  Lastly,  every  thing  in  the  book  perfectly  corresponds  with  the 
age  in  which  the  events  occurred. 

The  speeches  of  Joshua,  c.  xxiii.  xxiv.,  consist  of  scarcely  anything 
else  than  a  connected  series  of  expressions  used  by  Moses,  especially  of 
such  as  occur  in  Deuteronomy ;  while  this  is  not  the  case  in  the  speeches 
of  Caleb,  c.  xiv.  8 — 12;  of  Phineas ;  or  of  the  tribes  beyond  Jordan, 
0.  xxii.  1 1 — 34 ;  but  each  of  these  bears  the  impress  of  a  distinct  and 
different  character  in  the  speaker. 

[a)  Hence,  as  the  author  remarks,  (Germ.  Introd.  S.  171, 172.)  it  is  not 
improbable  that  these  documents  were  written  by  Joshua  himself.    TV.] 

[6)  In  the  German,  the  author  says,  '  by  David.'     TV.] 

§  30.     Difficulties  occurring  in  the  Book  of  Joshua. 

The  difficulties  which  occur  in  this  book  do  not  at  all  weaken  the 
credit  of  its  author  ;  for  either  they  are  caused  by  miracles  quite 
consistent  with  the  divine  dignity,  and  suitable  to  confirm  the  minds 
of  men  in  the  true  religion,  or  they  arise  from  false  interpretations. 

I.  The  stoppage  of  the  waters  of  Jordan  during  the  time  that  the 
priests  who  bore  the  ark  remained  in  the  bed  of  the  river,  Josh,  iii, 
iv.,  strengthened  the  faith  of  the  Hebrews,  especially  of  the  young, 
in  God  the  Creator  and  Governor  of  the  universe.  Nor  should  it  be 
objected  that  the  waters  rising  up  at  Zarethan  would  inundate  all  the 
plain  of  Jordan  ;  for  they  may  have  been  absorbed  by  a  subterranean 
cavity,  opened  perhaps  by  an  earthquake,  until  the  Israelites  had  lef^ 


230    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

the  bed  of  the  river  ;  so  that  the  miracle,  like  many  of  the  miracles 
of  Moses,  would  consist  in  the  revelation  of  a  future  event,  which  no 
human  sagacity  could  foresee.  That  this  miracle  did  take  place,  the 
monument  erected  in  memory  of  it,  was  a  witness  to  future  ages. 
Those  who,  in  order  to  get  rid  of  the  evidence  for  this  and  similar 
miraculous  events  arising  from  the  existence  of  coeval  monuments, 
conjecture  that  this  latter  fact  led  to  the  invention  of  the  miraculous 
histories,  are  destitute  of  all  foundation  for  their  opinion.  On  the 
contrary,  it  is  evident  from  contemporary  records  that  the  monuments 
were  erected  in  memory  of  the  events,  while  there  is  not  the  least 
indication  of  the  supposed  formation  of  the  histories  from  the  monu- 
ments.   Comp.  c.  vii  26.  viii.  29,  30 — 33.  xxii.  9,  s.  xxiv.  26.  &c. 

II.  In  like  manner  the  walls  of  Jericho,  c.  v.  13 — vi.  27.,  may  have 
been  overthrown  by  an  earthquake  at  the  moment  when  the  Israelites 
who  were  passing  the  city  shouted,  so  that  the  miracle  would  again 
consist  in  the  foreknowledge  of  the  event,  exceeding  all  the  powers 
of  human  reason.  However  this  may  be,  the  tendency  of  this  miracle 
would  be  of  the  same  important  nature  as  that  of  the  preceding. 

III.  The  celebrated  passage  c.  x.  12 — 15.,  is  poetical;  for  which 
reason  it  is  to  be  poetically  interpreted,  namely,  thus  ;  that  the  He- 
brews inflicted  a  defeat  upon  the  Canaanites  as  great  as  if  the  sun  had 
stopped  his  course,  and  had  prolonged  the  day  to  a  double  length,  [a] 
There  arose,  as  Habbakuk,  c.  iii.  10 — 12,  explains  it,  a  tempest  after 
the  battle,  which  first  destroyed  many  of  the  enemy  by  means  of  hail, 
and  afterwards  by  the  frequent  flashes  of  hghtning  rendered  the  re- 
mainder so  com-picuous  to  the  Israelites  that  they  were  able  to  pursue 
them  throughout  the  night,  as  if  it  had  been  day.  The  poet,  in  a  sub- 
lime ode,  by  a  bold  figure  introduces  Joshua  commanding  the  sun  and 
moon  to  stop  their  course,  and  by  a  still  bolder  stretch  of  figure, 
asserts  that  the  sun  and  moon  obeyed  the  mandate  of  a  man. 

[a)  '  Poetical  passages  are  not  to  be  uaderstood  in  the  whole  strepgth 
of  their  literal  meaning.  When  David  in  Ps.  xviii.  8 — 17,  describes 
himself  as  if  he  had  been  drowning  in  the  inundation  caused  by  a  tremen- 
dous tempest,  and  God  as  stretching  out  his  hand  from  the  clouds  (in 
allusion  to  a  water-spout)  and  snatching  him  from  the  flood,  no  one  ever 
thinks  of  understanding  all  this  literally,  but  every  reader  perceives  under 
these  splendid  figures  nothing  more  than  deliverance  from  great  danger?. 


OP   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.  231 

And  thus  is  the  place  under  consideration  to  be  explained.  As  the  He- 
brews were  pursuing  the  Canaanites  after  the  battle,  there  arose,  as  is 
expressly  stated  x.  11.,  a  violent  tempest,  which  caused  as  sH^eat  a  de- 
struction among  the  enemy  as  if  the  Hebrews  had  pursued  them  two  days 
without  an  intervening  night.  Thus  Habakkuk  explains  the  matter. 
When  he  says  that  "  the  sun  and  moon  stood  still,"  let  it  be  remembered 
that  he  also  speaks  in  elevated  poetry,  and  does  not  intend  to  be  under- 
stood literally,  for  he  immediately  adds  that  the  Hebrews  "  went  by  the 
light  of  God's  arrows,  by  the  shining  of  his  javelins,"  me&ning  Jiashes  of 
lightning.  But  to  what  purpose  these  flashes  if  the  sun  had  remained  in 
the  midst  of  the  heavens?' — Thus  the  author  in  his  Einleit.  S.  171.  As  his 
view  of  the  miracle  is,  to  say  the  least,  very  unsatisfactory,  it  is  proper  to 
state  that  the  latter  may  be  explained  on  two  suppositions.  Le  Clerc  and 
Drusius,  with  others,  suppose  it  to  have  been  owing  to  an  extraordmary 
refraction  of  the  rays  of  light  commencing  at  the  close  of  day  (d^DA  QVD) 

and  lasting  until  the  entire  discomfiture  of  the  Canaanites.  Others  sup- 
pose it  to  have  been  produced  by  a  cessation  of  the  diurnal  motion  of  the 
earth,  commencing  just  before  the  time  of  sunset,  and  lasting  during  an 
entire  day  (O'DH  DI'D)  or  the  period  of  half  a  complete  revolution  of 

the  earth.  That  this  last  exposition  of  the  words  0*on  DTD  is  very  an- 
cient,   appears  from  Ecclus.  xlvi.  4:   Ou)(»  £v  j^sigi  auTou  avswo^ifl'sv  o 

§  31.     Character  of  the  text  of  the  Book  of  Joshua. 

Other  difficulties  arise  from  the  introduction  of  errors  by  which  the 
text  has  suffered  in  many  places.  It  could  not  happen  otherwise  in  a 
book  of  such  great  antiquity,  particularly  as  it  abounds  with  proper 
names  of  places,  in  which  errors,  especially  omissions,  are  easily  made, 
and  not  readily  observed  so  as  to  be  amended.  So  c.  xv.  60.,  the  Alex- 
andrine version  adds  eleven  cities,  which  are  wanting  in  the  Hebrew 
text ;  c.  XV.  32.,  twenty-nine  cities  are  mentioned,  whereas  v.  20 — 31., 
thirty-two  had  been  previously  enumerated  ;  c.  xv.  33 — 36.,  fifteen 
cities  are  named,  while  in  ».  36  the  svun  is  stated  to  be  only  fourteen. 
See  c.  xix.  15,  30,  which  appear  to  be  imperfect.  In  v.  15,  only  fve 
cities  are  specified,  and  yet  the  sum  total  is  said  to  be  twelve.  In  v. 
30  only  three  are  named,  yet  the  sum  is  stated  at  twenty-two.  In  v. 
38  nineteen  cities  are  mentioned,  whereas  but  sixteen  had  been  pre- 


232  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH    BOOK 

viously  enumerated.  Comp.  also  Josh.  xix.  22.  with  I  Chron.  vi.  62, 
(77;)  and  Josh.  xix.  7.  with  I  Chron.  iv.  32.  The  exceedingly  difficult 
passage,  Josh.  iv.  9.,  concerning  the  monument  of  the  twelve  stones, 
which  are  said  to  have  been  erected  in  the  very  bed  of  Jordan,  is 

without  doubt  interpolated,  [a] The  Masora  unjustly  condemns  two 

verses,  c.  xxi.  36.  s.,  which  are  not  only  retained  by  384  MSS.,  and 
those  the  best  and  oldest,  by  141  editions,  and  by  all  the  ancient  ver- 
sions in  the  London  Polyglot,  except  the  Peshito,  but  are  moreover 
required  by  the  parallel  place,  I  Chron.  vi.  63.  s.  (78.  s.),  and  also  by 
the  context.  Besides,  the  omission  of  these  verses  would  have  been 
easy  on  account  of  the  similar  terminations  of  the  passage  imme- 
diately preceding,  and  of  the  second  verse  ;  but  the  transfer  of  the 
passage  from  T  Chron.  vi.  63.  s.  (78.  s.)  into  Joshua-  is  improbable, 
inasmuch  as  the  sense  of  the  passage  in  the  latter  place  is'  not  com- 
plete without  them,  [b] 

[a)  The  author's  assertion  appears  to  be  too  strong.  There  is  no  va- 
rious reading  on  this  passage,  and  the  mere  ground  of  its  diflSculty  is 
scarcely  sufficient  to  warrant  an  alteration  of  the  text.  The  danger  of 
admitting  such  a  method  of  proceeding  is  amply  illustrated  by  DeWette, 
Hasse,  and  others,  who  do  not  scruple  to  reject  as  interpolations  any  pas- 
sages which  do  not  please  them  (e.g.  c-  viii.  30 — 35.  x.  14,  15.),  and  yet, 
such  is  the  inconsistency  of  their  criticism,  elsewhere  adduce  them  as 
proofs  of  the  late  origin,  contradictory  character,  and  mythical  tendency, 
of  the  book  itself!  De  Wette.  Einleit.  «  168,  170,  166.  For  an  expla- 
nation of  the  passage  in  question  see  Shuckford,  Connexion  of  Sac.  and 
Prof.  Lit.  Vol.  III.  p.  361.  s.  ed.  Land.  1819.  Tr.] 

[b)  See  Jahn's  .Note  on  this  passage  in  his  Hebrew  Bible.     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.  233 


CHAPTER  III. 


OF  THE   BOOKS   OP   JUBGE9   AND   RUTH. 


§  32.     Contents  of  the  Booh  of  Judges. 

This  book  consists  of  three  parts,  viz.  c.  i — xvi ;  c.  xvii.  xviu  ; 
and  c.  xix — xxi.  They  have  no  other  connexion  than  that  which 
arises  from  their  containing  the  history  of  events  which  took  place 
in  the  time  of  the  Judges  ;  and  in  this  respect,  the  book  of  Ruth  is 
equally  connected  with  them  all.  [a] 

The  author  of  the  first  part  informs  us  (c.  i.)  which  of  the  tribes 
drove  out  the  Canaanites  after  the  death  of  Joshua,  and  which 
merely  made  them  tributary.  He  relates  (ii.  1 — 6.)  that  a  divine 
messenger  announced  to  the  latter  that  in  a  little  time  the  Canaan- 
ites would  entice  the  Hebrews  into  idolatry  and  overcome  them. 

This  prediction  the  author  illustrates  from  the  history,  ii.  7 — iii.  6, 
and  beginning  with  the  last  pubhc  assembhes  during  the  government 
of  Joshua,  observes  that  as  long  as  the  Israelites  were  faithful  to 
God  their  king,  they  were  superior  to  their  enemies,  and  prospered  ; 
but  when  they  spared  the  Canaanites,  and  contracted  marriages  with 
them,  they  were  led  into  idolatry  by  them,  and  at  length  were  subju- 
gated by  other  nations.  If,  however,  at  any  time,  oppressed  by  these 
calamities,  they  renounced  their  idolatry  and  turned  again  to  God, 
some  hero  was  raised  up,  who  conquered  their  enemies,  and  restored 
them  to  their  liberty.  This  the  author  proves  by  recounting  particu- 
lar histories,  c.  iii.  7 — xvi.  31.  [b] 

[a)  The  ancient  Jews  therefore  considered  Judges  and  Rath  as  one 
Tmok.    Comp.  Part.  I.  §  28.  ^Ecseb.  H.  E.  VI.  25.] 

3D 


234         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH   BOOK 

[b)  The  following  is  a  more  extended  view  of  the  contents  of  this 
part  of  the  book. 

I.  When  the  generation  which  had  renewed  the  covenant  with  Jeho- 
vah (Josh,  xxiv.)  had  died,  the  Hebrews  became  idolatrous,  and  were 
consequently  subjected  during  eight  years  to  the  yoke  of  Cushan-risha- 
Ihaim,  king  of  Mesopotamia.  But  upon  their  conversion  to  Jehovah, 
they  were  delivered  by  Othniel,  and  had  rest  forty  years,  iii.  8 — 11. 

II.  Upon  the  renewal  of  their  idolatry,  they  fell  under  the  harder 
j'oke  of  the  king  of  Moab,  who,  in  connexion  with  the  Ammonites  and 
Amalekites,  oppressed  for  eighteen  years  the  tribes  on  the  other  side  of 
Jordan,  and  the  southern  tribes  on  this  side.  Ehud  restored  them  to 
freedom,  and  a  peace  of  eighty  years  followed,  iii.  12 — 30. 

III.  After  this  the  northern  tribes,  in  consequence  of  their  wickedness, 
were  distressed  twenty  years  by  Jabin.  Barak  was  called  to  deliver 
them  by  the  prophetess  Deborah,  (iv.  24.),  and  the  victory  was  perpetu- 
ated in  a  triumphal  poem,  c.  v.  In  the  time  of  this  servitude,  or  rather 
before  it,  the  Philistines  were  subjected  by  Shamgar,  iii.  3.  v.  6.  A 
peace  of  forty  years  duration  succeeded  the  victory  of  Barak,  v.  31. 

IV.  The  Israelites  were  afterwards,  on  account  of  tlieir  apostacy,  op- 
pressed for  seven  years  by  the  nomade  Midianites,  Amalekites,  and  East- 
ern people,  (i.  e.  Arabians,)  who  are  called  (viii.  24.)  Ishmaelites.  They 
were  freed  by  Gideon,  and  forty  years  of  peace  succeeded ;  vi.  1 — 
viii.  33.  Here  is  added  the  account  of  the  idolatrous  Shechemites,  who 
chose  Abimelek,  a  son  of  Gideon,  for  their  king,  with  the  distresses 
which  they  experienced  from  him ;  ix.  1 — 57. 

V.  Tola,  of  the  tribe  of  Issachar,  who  ruled  the  northern  tribes  twenty- 
three  years,  and  Jair,  who  was  governor  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan 
twenty-two  years,  are  merely  mentioned,  x.  1 — 5  :  perhaps  because  they 
protected  the  people  rather  by  suitable  preparations  than  by  warlike 
undertakings. 

VI.  As  the  Israelites  extended  their  idolatries,  and  honoured  almost 
all  the  gods  of  their  neighbours,  the  tribes  on  the  other  side  of  Jordan 
were  oppressed  during  eighteen  years  by  the  Ammonites,  who  also  at- 
tacked the  southern  tribes  on  this  side,  who  already  had  powerful  ene- 
mies in  the  Philistines.  Their  deliverer  was  Jephtha,  who  after  his  suc- 
cess conquered  the  jealous  Ephraimites,  with  a  loss  on  tlieir  side  of 
40,000  men.     He  governed  six  years  :  x.  6 — xii.  7. 

VII.  Ibzan  of  Bethlehem,  who  was  governor  seven  years,  appears  to 
have  defended  the  southern  tribes  against  the  Philistines ;  xii.  8 — 10. 

VIII.  Elon,  of  the  tribe  of  Zebulon,  ruled  the  northern  tribes  ten 
years;  xii.  11.  s. 

IX.  Abdon,  of  Ephraim,  exercised  authority  eight  years  over  the  tribe? 
who  were  situated  in  the  middle  of  the  country;  xii.  13 — 15. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  235 

X.  The  southern  tribes  were  oppressed  by  the  Philistines  forty  years, 
which  period,  however,  includes  no  doubt  the  times  of  Ibzan  and  Sam- 
son. The  latter  frequently  routed  the  Philistines ;  but  his  history  is  only 
told  in  part,  and  proofs  of  his  extraordinary  strength  introduced,  proba- 
bly with  the  view  of  showing  the  abilities  with  which  God  had  favoured 
him,  but  which  neither  he  nor  the  people  suitably  improved ;  xiii.  1 — 
xvi.  31.     TV.] 

§  33.     Design  of  the  Booh  of  Judges. 

From  the  preceding  account  of  the  contents,  it  appears  that  the 
design  of  the  author  was  to  show,  from  their  history,  that  the  Israel- 
ites had  been  governed  by  Goi>  their  king,  during  all  the  period  of 
time  to  which  his  book  relates,  according  to  the  conditions  specified 
in  the  Law,  Ex.  xxiii.  Lev.  xxvi.  Deut.  xxviii — xxxii,,  and  that  the 
calamities  which  they  suffered  were  to  be  imputed  to  their  neglect  of 
the  Law  ;  for  which  reason  they  could  not  expect  any  better  state, 
unless  they  avoided  those  crimes  which  had  hitherto  prevented  their 
enjoying  any  permanent  prosperity,  [a] 

Hence  it  is  evident  that  chronologers  have  altogether  mistaken,  in  sup- 
posing that  it  was  the  author's  intention  to  relate  the  whole  of  the  his- 
tory of  this  period ;  for  there  are  long  intervals  of  time  concerning  which 
he  says  nothing,  and  does  not  specify  the  number  of  years.  He  relates 
nothing  but  what  would  tend  to  remind  the  Israelites  of  the  worship  of 
God,  and  of  obedience  to  his  commands. Hence  it  is  impossible  pre- 
cisely to  fix  the  date  of  each  particular  event.  In  the  time  of  Paul  (Ac, 
xiii.  20.)  they  reckoned  450  years  from  the  death  of  Joshua  to  the  com- 
mencement of  the  reign  of  Saul,  and  this  agrees  witli  the  contents  of  the 
book  of  Judges.  For  if  from  450  we  subtract  the  40  years  of  Eli,  the 
20  years  after  his  death,  and  the  40  years  of  Samuel,  there  will  remain 
350  years,  which  number  agrees  with  Judg.  xi.  26.,  where,  in  the  time 
of  Jephthah,  300  years  are  reckoned  from  the  death  of  Moses.  Comp. 
Germ.  Introd.  P.  I.  {  153.  p.  538. 

[a)  It  was  therefore  not  so  much  his  object  to  relate  that  their  apos- 
tacy  was  the  consequence  of  sparing  the  Canaanitcs,  and  subjection  to 
foreign  powers  the  consequence  of  apostacy,  but  rather  to  state  those 
facts  as  a  warning  to  his  readers,  in  the  same  disposition  which  Samuel 
shows  in  his  address,  I  Sam.  xii,  14.  20 — 25.] 


236         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

§  34.     Age  of  the  Booh  of  Judges. 

That  the  book  was  not  written,  as  has  been  thought,  during  the  Ba- 
bylonish captivity,  is  proved  by  the  character  of  the  language,  which  is 
free  from  Chaldee  and  other  recent  words,  and  contains,  on  the  con- 
trary, many  which  are  common  to  the  Pentateuch  and  the  book  of 
Joshua,  but  not  to  be  found  in  the  more  modern  books.     The  limits 

of  this  work,  however,  will  not  allow  me  to  enumerate  them. 

Nor  are  there  any  other  signs  of  a  recent  origin.  The  date  of  the 
book  may  be  correctly  inferred  from  the  silence  of  the  author  re- 
specting the  capture  of  Jerusalem  by  David,  which  had  it  taken 
place  before  his  time,  the  nature  of  his  subject  in  c.  i.  21.  would  not 
have  permitted  him  to  pass  over  in  silence,  [a]  Nor  does  the  occui-- 
rence  of  the  name  Jerusalem  in  these  passages,  indicate  an  origin 
posterior  to  the  capture  of  the  city  by  David  :  for  since  in  If  Sam. 
v,  6 — 10.  I  Chron.  xi.  4 — 9,  it  is  merely  said  that  David  called  the 
citadel  of  Zion  the  city  of  David,  without  any  mention  of  a  new  de- 
signation of  the  city  of  the  Jebusites,  we  may  conclude  that  the  name 
Jerusalem,  (D^tyn%)  is  more  ancient  than  that  time,  and  was  applied 

to  the  place  because  it  was  a  safe  possession  or  residence,  in  conse- 
quence of  its  situation  on  a  mountain,  and  its  strong  fortifications. 

The  omission  of  the  history,  not  only  of  Samuel,  but  also  of  Eli,  in- 
dicates an  author,  who,  living  in  an  age  very  near  that  of  Eli,  consi- 
dered his  history  as  generally  known,  because  so  recent.  If  the 
author  be  placed  as  low  as  the  first  years  of  David's  reign,  this  ob- 
servation will  not  apply,  and  it  will  be  difficult  to  account  for  these 
omissions The  object  of  the  writer  suits  the  time  when  the  Is- 
raelites made  Saul  their  king  in  the  hope  of  improving  their  condi- 
tion ;  for  the  book  is  composed  with  the  design  of  showing  that  a 
better  condition  was  not  to  be  expected,  unless  the  people  themselves 
became  better.  And  this  agrees  with  what  Samuel  solemnly  declares 
to  the  Israelites,  I  Sam.  vii.  2.  xii.  14—16,  20,  24.  s.  The  book, 
therefore,  must  have  been  written  in  the  first  years  of  the  reign 
of  Saul,  and  perhaps  was  composed,  as  the  Talmudists  assert,  by 
Samuel  himself,  with  the  spirit  of  whose  admonitions  it  so  perfectly 
accords.  [6") 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  237 

That  the  book  of  Judges  was  not  written  by  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Joshua,  is  shown  by  the  difference  of  the  method  of  relating  subjects,  and 
by  the  difference  of  the  style. — 1)  In  the  book  of  Joshua  there  is  a  conti- 
nual reference  to  the  Law  of  iVloses[c],  which  is  much  less  frequent  in 
the  book  of  Judges. [rf]— 2)  In  Joshua  there  are  no  such  inferences  from 
the  history  as  those  which  are  so  common  in  Judges.[e] — 3)  The  style  of 
the  book  of  Joshua  is  neater  than  that  of  Judges  ;  the  narration  is  more 
clear,  and  the  arrangement  is  better, [/] 

[a)  To  this  it  may  be  added,  that  the  author  of  the  book,  in  the  pas- 
sage cited,  tells  us  that  in  his  time  the  Benjamites  and  Jebusites  dwelt  to- 
gether at  Jerusalem ;  which  could  hardly  have  been  said  after  David's 
conquest.     TV.] 

[6)  This  Jewish  tradition  agreeing  so  well  with  the  internal  evidence 
of  the  book  itself,  is  entitled  to  no  small  consideration. Eichhorn  ob- 
serves that  after  a  careful  examination,  he  can  discover  in  this  work  no 
trace  of  any  subsequent  period,  but  rather  intimations  of  its  having  been 
written  either  at  the  end  of  the  age  of  the  Judges,  or  at  the  beginning  of 

the  reign  of  Saul. De  Wette  allows  it  to  be  of  very  high  antiquity, 

and  supposes  it  to  be  older  than  the  book  of  Joshua. 

The  title  of  the  book  is  obviously  derived  from  its  subject,  the  actions 
of  the  Jv4ges  (D''t33iZ7,  c  ii.  16.  ss.  &c.)  i.  e.  the  rulers  of  the  people 

both  in  peace  and  war,  but  especially  those  who  were  raised  up  by  divine 
providence  for  the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites  from  their  enemies.  The 
term  D'DDty,  as  used  in  this  title,  has  no  reference  to  any  peculiar  judi- 
cial office,  although  such  an  office  was  occasionally  exercised  by  those  to 
whom  it  is  applied  (Judg.  iv.  1.  comp.  I.  Sam.  vii.  15.  s.),  but  merely  ex- 
presses generally  the  idea  of  authority  and  rule  however  obtained  and 
however  exercised.     TV.] 

[c)  See  ^  25.  note  b).     TV.] 

\d)  Nevertheless  the  contents  of  the  books  of  Moses  are  often  referred 
to;  as,  for  instance,  the  Exode,  in  ii.  1,  10-  vi.  8,  9,  13.  x.  11.;  the  con- 
quests on  the  other  side  of  Jordan,  in  xi.  15 — 28.;  the  sanctions  of  the 
Law,  in  ii.  15.;  the  Nazarite,  in  xiii.  4.  s.,  7,  14.  xvi.  17.;  and  the  vow 
called  cherem^  in  xi.  31, 34 — 39.] 

[e)  For  instance,  iii.  1,  4.  viii.  27.  ix.  56.  s.  &c.  TV.] 

[/)  Comp.  i.  10,  11,  20.  with  Josh.  xiv.  6—15.,  and  xv.  13—19.:  also 
ii.  7—10.  with  Josh.  xxiv.  29—31.] 

§  35.     The  Book  of  Judges  is  taken  from  ancient  documents. 

The  book  of  Judges  is  compiled  from  ancient  documents. 1) 

The  song  of  Deborah  in  attestation  of  the  expedition  of  Barak  (c.  v.). 


238         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

and  the  parable  of  Jotham  (c.  ix.  8 — 15),  are  copied  from  these  ;  for 
the  style  and  character  of  the  book  prove  that  these  pieces  could  not 

have  been  written  by  its  author. There  are  also  some  things  taken 

verbatim  from  the  book  of  Joshua. The  history  of  Samson  ap- 
pears to  consist  of  two  documents,  each  of  them  terminating  (c.  xv. 
20.  xvi.  31.)  with  the  number  of  years  during  which  Samson  judged 
Israel  and  both  expressing  ideas  previously  occurring  in  language  dif- 
ferent from  any  before  used. [a] 2)     The  book  contains  several 

fragments  as  c.  iii.  31,  concerning  Shamgar  ;  c.  x.  1 — 5,  concerning 
Tola  and  Jair  ;  c.  xii.  8.  s.,  11 — 13,  14.  concerning  Ibzan,  Elon, 
and  Abdon,  of  all  of  whom  the  author  knew  and  relates  the 
number  of  years  that  they  governed,  and  the  number  of  their  sons, 
and  even  of  their  daughters,  but  none  of  their  transactions.  When 
he  tells  us  what  tribes  waged  war  against  the  Canaanites,  he  says 
nothing  of  Issachar  ;  and  when  he  speaks  of  the  apostacy  to  idolatry, 
he  has  no  information  to  give  respecting  the  tribes  beyond  Jordan. 
But  on  the  other  hand,  he  narrates  at  length  the  transactions  at 
Gideon  and  Abimelech,  and  also  of  Jephthah  on  the  other  side  of 
Jordan,  who  was  distinguished  for  his  victories  over  the  Ephraimites 

on  this  side. Hence  it  is  plain  that  the  author  has  taken  some  of 

his  details  from  the  genealogies,  in  which  some  historical  accounts 
were  usually  inserted  ;  and  from  this  source  he  has  derived  his  nar- 
rative of  the  circumstances  that  preceded  the  conception  of  Samson, 
which  are  given  as  the  parents  related  them  to  the  genealogist. 

[a)  Thus,  for  instance,  in  the  history  of  Samson  we  do  not  find  such 
expressions  as  "  the  anger  of  Jehovah  was  hot,  and  he  sold  them  into 
the  hand  of  their  enemies"  (ii.  14,  20.  iii.  8.  x.  7.),  but  "  he  delivered 
them  "  (xiii.  1.).  Neither  do  we  find,  as  elsewhere  (xviii.  22,  23.  vii.  23, 
24.  X.  17.)  p;7l  or  pj?jf  used  for  '  the  calling;  or  coming;  together  of  an 

army.'*     And  the   remarkable   phraseology    IDJ^sS    mn'   Fin  Snni 

(' the  spirit  of  Jehovah  began  to  move  him')  or  vhy  niH''  nil  nSsffll 

('  the  spirit  of  Jehovah  came  mightily  upon  him,'  or  '  drave  him,') 
occurs  (c.  xiii.  25.  xiv.  6,  19.  xv.  14.)  in  cases  where  before  it  is  said 
V^y  nin''  nn  Tirtt    ('the  spirit  of  Jehovah  was   upon  him,')    or 

*  [For  this  peculiarity,  however,   the  simple  reason  may  be  assigned,  that  the 
author  had  no  occasion  to  make  nse  of  that  exjj/rcssion.  T^'.J 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  239 

ricy3'7  mn''  nn  ('the  spirit  of  Jehovah  clothed,')  as  in  iii.  10.  vi, 

'^   :  I  T      -     : 

34.  si.  29.] [De  Wette,  allowing  the  hypothesis  that  the  history  of 

Samson  is  a  separate  document  to  be  probable,  rejects  the  supposition 
that  it  consists  of  Iwo,  contending  that  c.  xvi.  31.  is  the  close  of  the  one 
history :  comp,  viii.  32.  xii.  7,  10,  12,  15. Einleit.  ^  174.     TV.] 

§  36.     Authority  of  the  Book  of  Judges. 

The  care  with  which  the  author  has  made  use  of  his  documents  is 
evident ;  1)  from  the  fact  that  he  has  retained  the  double  ending  of 
those  which  relate  to  Sampson,  c.  xv.  20.  xvi.  31  ;  and,  as  is  proved 
by  the  difference  of  the  style,  has  preserved  the  very  words  of  the 

original  documents. 2)    All  his  narratives  are  in  character  with 

the  age  to  which  they  belong,  nor  does  he  in  any  manner  attempt  to 
soften  or   excuse    acts  of  harshness,    severity,    or  injustice  ;  c.  iii. 

18—23.  iv.  18—22.  viii.  13—21.  ix.  4.  xii.  5.  s.  xvi.  21,  27. 3) 

The  more  remarkable  events,  as  well  as  all  other  matters,  agree  with 
the  accustomed  order  of  things.  The  Hebrews,  but  little  accustomed 
to  war,  are  rendered  effeminate  by  residence  in  a  fertile  country, 
and  show  a  forbidden  lenity  to  the  Canaanites,  whom  they  are  con- 
tent to  render  tributary.  They  are  seduced  to  idolatry,  which,  by  its 
admixture  of  voluptuous  indulgence  with  the  worship  of  the  gods, 
increases  their  luxuriousness  and  effeminacy.  In  this  state  they  are 
overpowered  by  their  enemies,  and  subjected  to  cruel  servitude.  In 
such  circumstances,  it  is  by  no  means  an  unheard  of  or  incredible 
thing  that  some  person  should  rise  up,  or  be  chosen,  who,  filled  with 
heroism,  calls  the  people  to  arms,  conquers  their  enemies,  and  deli- 
vers his  country.  These  men,  indeed,  are  highly  extolled  by  the 
author  of  the  book  of  Judges  ;  but  then,  on  the  other  hand,  he  is  not 
silent  respecting  their  faults,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  instances  of 

Ehud,  Jephthah,  Samson,  and  Gideon  with  his  ephod. 4)  Lastly, 

the  book  was  published  and  received  in  an  age  in  wliich  the  Israel- 
ites might  have  ascertained  the  veracity  of  the  author  by  comparing 
his  narrative  with  the  original  documents  yet  extant,  and  in  which  the 
events  narrated  were  generally  known,  as  appears  from  Ps.  Ixxviii, 
56—68.  Ixxxiii.  9—12.  cvi.  34—46.  I  Sam.  xii.  9—12. 


240         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH   BOOK 

§  37.     Difficulties  in  tJie  Book  of  Judges. 

If  the  wonders  which  are  related  in  this  book  are  accurately  exami- 
ned with  reference  to  the  circumstances  and  opinions  of  the  age  in 
which  they  took  place,  without  adding  any  thing  which  is  not  expres- 
sed, or  attributing  to  the  expressions  a  meaning  which  does  not  be- 
long  to  them,  they  will  be  found  neither  extravagant  nor  surpassing 
belief  [a] 

I.  Shamgar,  c.  iii.  31.  v.  6.,  armed  only  with  an  ox-goad  beat 
(^'i)  600  Philistines.     Now  it  is  not  said,  either  that  he  was  alone,  or 

that  he  slew  the  whole  six  hundred.  He  may  have  been  the  first  who 
resisted  the  invaders,  and  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  a  body  of  men 
previously  employed,  like  himself,  in  ploughing  :  in  this  case  the  vic- 
tory would  be  attributed  to  him,  as  another  is,  I  Sam.  xviii.  7.  to  Saul 
and  David.  [&] 

II.  Barak  with  10,000  soldiers,  taking  advantage  of  a  raging  tem- 
pest, (Judg.  V.  4.  s.,  10.,)  rushed  suddenly  from  mount  Tabor  (c.  iv. 
12 — 14.)  upon  the  unprepared  army  of  Sisera,  whose  chariots  of  war, 
broken  and  disarrayed,  so  blocked  up  the  way  that  the  rest  of  the 
army  could  neither  fight,  nor  fly  with  ease,  and  the  commander  him- 
self could  with  difficulty  make  his  escape  on  foot  (c.  iv.  2 — 15).  Jael, 
ignorant  of  all  that  had  taken  place,  in  good  faith  invited  Sisera  to  rest 
himself  within  her  tent,  and  quenched  his  thirst  with  sour  camel's 
milk,  a  beverage  which  has  an  inebriating  effect ;  but  upon  reflec- 
tion, thinking  it  an  act  of  treason  to  preserve  an  enemy  of  the  people 
under  whose  protection  she  was  living,  slew  him  as  he  slept,  and 
thereby  obtained  the  reputation,  not  indeed  of  holiness,  but  of  forti- 
tude and  patriotic  zeal. 

III.  The  miracles  in  the  history  of  Gideon,  c.  vi.  11 — 26,  36 — 40, 
are  so  connected  with  the  dismission  of  the  major  part  of  the  army, 
(c.  vii.  2 — 8.),  and  this  with  the  subsequent  victory,  that  tlie  history 
of  either  without  that  of  the  other  would  be  an  enigma  :  on  which 
account  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  the  reality  of  those  wonders.  The 
victory  obtained  by  300  soldiers  over  the  innumerable  host  of  Midia- 
nites,  by  the  aid  of  an  extraordinary  stratagem,  is  not  unexampled. 
Nor  is  it  to  be  forgotten,  that  these  300  men  were  assisted,  as  is  rela- 
ted in  c.  vii.  23 — 25,  by  the  soldiers  who  had  been  dismissed,  and  bv 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  21 1 

very  many  others,  who  joined  in  the  pursuit  of  the  enemy  already  pul 
to  flight.     Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  Th.  IT.  Sect.  I.  §  37.  S.  197.  s.[c] 

IV,  Jephthah  vowed  a  vow  (anathema,  a  d.dicaiary  vow)  that 
whatever  should  first  come  out  of  the  door  of  his  house  to  meet  him 
at  his  victorious  return,  should  be  sacred  to  God,  and  (if  it  should  be 
any  thing  which  could  be  sacrificed)  should  be  offered  as  a  burnt- 
offering.  When  it  is  said  that  '  he  did  according  to  his  vow  '  to  his 
daughter,  who  was  the  first  that  met  him,  it  must  be  understood 
that  he  slew  her,  but  not  that  he  offered  her  as  a  burnt-offering  ;  for 
this  no  priest  would  have  suffered.  His  conduct  was  indeed  repug- 
nant to  good  morals,  and  to  the  law  of  Moses,  W  lo  had  established 
the  Din,  or  vow  of  destruction,  in  order  to  afford  an  example  of  pun- 
ishment ;  but  it  would  be  idle  to  expect  any  great  mowledge  of  moral 
discipline  or  of  the  Mosaic  law  from  a  man  who  ^  as  the  son  of  a  har- 
lot, and,  while  an  outcast  from  his  home  and  cc  ntry,  the  leader  of 
a  band  of  robbers. [ti] 

V,  The  prodigious  powers  of  Samson  do  not  c  sate  any  difficulty  ; 
for  history  affords  many  instances  of  men  of  vas  strength  ;  some  of 
which  are  noticed  in  the  Germ.  Introd.  P.  IT.  Set  .  I.  §  37.  S.  199 — 

205. 1)  Samson's   extraordinary  strength  ent  aled  him  to  slay  a 

lion,  although  he  was  unarmed  (c.  xiv.  5,  6.).  '  'his  was  done  too 
by  David  and  by  Benaiah,  I  Sam.  xvii.  34.  ss.  II  I  lam.  xxiii.  20.,  and 
other  similar  instances  might  be  adduced,  both  i  i  past  ages,  and  in 

our  own.[e] 2)     Samson  with  a  few  assistants  could  easily  catch 

three  hundred  jackals  (c.  xv.  4,  5,  8.),  a  stupid  sort  of  animal  that  is 
gregarious  and  does  not  shun  the  approach  of  men.     For  chpy^  in 

this  place  does  not  signify ^oore*,  who  would  have  fled  immediately  to 
their  holes  and  not  have  wandered  about  the  fields  of  the  Philistines. 
Bui  jackals  would  have  answered  the  purpose  of  Samson  admirably  ; 
and  the  same  name  is  applied  both  to  those  creatures  and  to  foxes  by 
the  Hebrews  and  Arabs,  on  which  account  the  former  distinguish  the 
fox  by  the  epithet  little  ;  D"'it3p  cbyw. 3)  It  was  not  beyond  the 

powers  of  a  robust  man  to  slay  singly  thirty  Philistines,  in  order  to  pay 
with  their  spoils  the  forfeit  which  he  had  lost  by  treachery,  c.  xiv.  19. 

4)  Samson  in  his  full  strength  would  be  able  to  break  new  cords 

and  even  green  withes,  c.  xv.  9 — 15.  xvi.  7 — 9,  11.  s. 5)  A  man 

31 


242  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOK 

celebrated  for  his  prodigious  strength,  might  smite  or  put  to  fight  (tor 
so  the  verb  nun  is  often  elsewhere  used)  with  the  jaw-bone  of  an 

ass  a  thousand  PhiUstines,  who,  in  order  to  secure  a  terrible  enemy, 
had  come  with  a  secret  terror,  and  who  were  panic  struck  by  his  sud- 
denly breaking  the  cords  which  bound  him.  Nor  is  it  to  be  doubted 
that  the  Hebrews  who  were  on  the  spot  for  the  purpose  of  delivering 
Samson  to  the  Phihstines,  would  assist  him  in  attacking  them,  terror- 
struck  as  they  were,  and  put  to  flight.  That  in  his  triumphal  song 
(c.  XV.  16.)  Samson  attributes  the  victory  to  himself  alone,  creates  no 
difiiculty  ;  for  the  poetry  in  question  was  not  spoken  by  Samson  fresh 
from  the  theatre  of  action,  but  is  cited  by  the  author  from  some  old 
poem  as  a  testimony  of  the  transaction.  [/"]  The  same  is  also  to  be 
said  of  c.  xiv.  18.  where  Samson  is  represented  as  uttering  a  poetical 
and  even  rhythmical  composition.  Hence  it  appears  that  the  history 
of  Samson  is  everywhere  taken  from  poems  in  which  his  deeds  were 
poetically  represented, [g]  and  therefore  its  expressions  are  not  all  to 
be  forced  to  the  most  rigorous  signification  of  which  they  are  suscep- 
tible.  6)     The  fountain  of  water,  Judg.  xv.  19.,  did  not  arise  out 

of  the  jaw-bone  of  the  ass,  but  out  of  "the  place,  which  either  at  that 
very  time,  or  subsequently  on  account  of  the  preceding  feat  of  Sam- 
son, was  called  the  height  of  the  jaw,  'nbn  fiDT  :  for  it  is  not  un- 
common among  the  orientals  to  designate  a  place  by  the  name  of  the 
jaw,  as  we  find  in  the  Targums,  the  jaw  of  Moab,   DNID  DTlS,  arid 

among  the  Arabs  there  is  a  tribe  known  bj  the  name  of  the  two  jaws, 
(a  \^vs^'  ;  MiCHAELis  Chrestomath.  Arab.  p.  54. 7)  The  car- 
rying away  of  the  doors  of  the  gate  of  Gaza-  which,  however,  were 
not  at  all  like  those  of  the  present  day,  to  the  mountain  opposite  He- 
bron, was  not  a  feat  exceeding  the  powers  of  a  man  of  uncommon 
strength  ;  for  there  are  many  instances,  both  in  ancient  and  modern 

history,  of  persons  who  have  carried  even  greater  weights. [A] -8) 

The  temple  of  Dagon,  supported  by  two  columns,  was  without  doubt 
a  structure  similar  to  that  described  in  the  Bibl.  Archaeol.  P.  I.  Th. 
I.  §  45.  S.  211.  (Upham's  Trans.  §36.  p.  40.),  the  columns  of  which, 
if  the  structure  were  somewhat  decayed,  might  easily  be  so  shaken  by 
a  man  of  more  than  ordinary  strength,  that  the  flat  roof  which  rested 
en  them  should  fall  in ;  Judg.  xvi.  28.  s. 9)  The  connexion  of 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  243 

Samson's  strength  with  the  preservation  of  his  hair,  Judg.  xvi.  16 — 
1 9r  was  merely  his  own  supposition.  Hence  when  his  hair  was  shorn 
his  courage  forsook  him,  and  he  did  not  dare  to  try  liis  strength  ;  but 
with  the  growth  of  his  hair  his  courage  returned,  and  he  was  capable 
of  exerting  his  former  strength.  This  the  PhiUstines  themselves  had 
observed  to  be  the  case,  and  therefore  not  content  with  shaving  his 
head,  they  deprived  him  of  his  sight  too,  and  bound  him  with  chains 

of  brass  ;  paying  no  attention  to  the  growth  of  his  hair.[i] 10) 

With  respect  to  the  supernatural  appearances  which  are  said  to  have 
preceded  the  birth  of  Samson,  it  would  not  have  been  worth  while  to 
invent  such  accounts  concerning  a  man  notoriously  guilty  of  fornica- 
tion, and  who  destroyed  himself  in  order  to  gratify  his  revenge  ;  and 
if  they  had  laboured  under  any  suspicion" of  being  feigned,  they  would 
have  been  omitted  by  the  author.  The  parents  of  Samson  must  have 
related  them  to  the  genealogist,  or  they  would  not  have  been  recount- 
ed by  an  author  who  is  otherwise  well;^worthy  of  our  credence, 

who  does  not  praise  Samson  in  any  other  respect  than  as  he  began  to 

liberate  the  Israelites  from  the  Philistine  yoke, and  who  relates  the 

extraordinary  feats  of  his  prowess  only  to  show  what  a  hero  Gon 
would  have  given  to  the  Hebrews,  if  they  had  chosen  suitably  to  avail 

themselves  of  his  uncommon  endowments. Finally,  it  can  hardly  be 

doubted  that  the  history  of  Samson Js  incomplete  ;  for  what  he  did  as 
governor  of  the  people,  is  either  passed  over  in  silence,  or  at  most 
but  very  slightly  touched  ;  c.  xiii.  25.  Hence  Samson  may  have  been 
a  civil  governor  worthy  of  commendation,  who  began  well,  but  ended 
ill :  nor  would  he  be  the  only  example  of  such  a  character  that  his- 
tory could  afford. 

[a)  It  should  also  be  borne  in  mind,  that  the  Judges  frequently  aeted 
under  the  immediate  influence  of  the  Divinity,  by  whom  they  were  en- 
dowed with  supernatural  wisdom,  strength,  and  courage.  In  some 
cases,  such  as  that  of  Samson's  suicide,  they  may  have  abused  their  en- 
dowments, since  the  supernatural  gifts  of  God  are  equally  liable  to  abuse 
with  those  which  he  bestows  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature.     TV.] 

\b)  There  is  no  difficulty  in  such  language;  expressions  of  the  same 
kind  are  in  common  use  at  the  present  day.  Nor  does  any  objection 
arise  from  the  nature  of  the  instrument,  which  was  well  fitted  for  such 
a  purpose.  Comp.  Archaeol.  J  59.  Upham's  Trans.  Eichhorw,  Eih-- 
l<5it.  ^  460.  S.  4M.     TV.] 


*■ 


244     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[c)  The  author  refers  to  Diodorus  Siculus,  XX.  66.  and  Niebuhr's 
description  of  Arabia,  p.  304,  for  two  instances  of  the  rout  of  an  army 
equally  remarkable  with  that  in  the  book  of  Judges.     TV.] 

[d)  Comp.  Archaeol.  §  394.  Upham's  Trans,  and  see  Dathe's  note 
■in  loc,  where  he  defends  the  same  view  of  the  subject.  Some  have 
thought  that  Jephthah's  daughter  was  devoted  in  a  state  of  perpetual 
virginity  to  the  service  of  the  tabernacle  in  some  way  :  but  there  is  no 
evidence  of  such  persons  being  so  employed.  The  only  texts  which 
might  be  thought  to  favour  such  an  opinion  are  Num.  xxxi.  10,  15 — 18; 
but  it  is  plain  that  these  women,  who  are  said  to  be  the  Lord's,  were  in- 
tended for  the  high  priest's  service,  and  are  therefore  called  '  a  heave 
offering,'  See  v.  29,  41.,  and  comp.  xviii-  19.  See,  however,  Hale's 
Analysis  of  Chronology,  Vol.  II.  pp.  320—323.     TV.] 

[c)  See  Acta  Dei  per  Francos,  Tom.  I.  p.  75,  314 ;  Joe  Lfdolphi 
Historia  ^thiopica,  J  48 ;  Arnieux'  Remarkable  Accounts,  Part  2d. 
c.  xiii ;  Lobo's  Travels  in  Abyssinia,  Part  I.  p.  155  ;  Bocharti  Hiero- 
zoicon,  Tom.  I.  p.  753 ;  Schillingers  Missions  Bericht.  Th.  IV.  S.  79 ; 
Plinii  Hist.  L.  VIII.  c.  21.] 

[/)  Admitting  this  to  be  true,  which  wants  proof,  still  the  terms  being 
express,  and  cited  by  the  author  of  the  book  or  document  without 
qualification,  and  as  a  statement  of  a  fact,  are  sufficient  to  refute 
Jahn's  hypothesis.  The  only  method  of  accounting  for  this  transaction  is 
by  admitting  what  the  narrative  expressly  (y.  14,  16,  19,)  asserts,  an  ex- 
traordinary divine  assistance.     Tr.] 

[g)  This  is  a  rash  assertion.  Granting  the  author's  position  respect- 
ing XV.  16.  xiv.  18.,  the  insertion  of  two  passages  is  far  from  proving 
that  the  history  of  Samson  is  everywhere  derived  from  poetic  sources,  and 
therefore  exaggerated.  But  it  is  not  certain  that  these  passages  afe  quo- 
tations from  old  poems.  No  such  documents  are  cited  by  the  author,  as 
is  elsewhere  customary  (Num.  xxi.  14.  Josh.  x.  13.  II  Sam.  i.  18.),  but 
it  is  unequivocally  asserted  that  '•  Samson  said,'  &c.  TV.] 
[ft)  See  Plinii  Hist.  Nat.  L.  VII.  c.  20.] 

[i)  It  is  plain  from  the  narrative  that  the  connexion  of  Samson's 
strength  with  the  growth  of  his  hair  was  not  merely  his  own  supposition. 
Upon  his  being  shaven,  it  is  expressly  said  that  '  his  strength  went  from 
him'  (xvi.  9.)  ;  and  upon  his  awaking  it  is  also  said  that  he  made  an 
effort  to  do  as  he  had  done  heretofore,  '  not  knowing  that  the  Lord  was 
departed  from  him'  (v.  20.)  :  hence  it  appears  that  it  was  not  the  effect 
of  his  conceit  which  rendered  him  powerless,  and  prevented  him  from 
'  daring  to  try  his  strength,'  since  he  actually  did  attempt  to  exert  his 
might  as  usual,  but  found  it  departed  from  him.  He  had  broken  the 
conditions  upon  which  supernatural  strength  had  been  promised  before 
lus  birth  (xiii.  5.),  and  the  gift  was  taken  from  him.     Besides,  at  the 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  245 

time  of  his  capture,  and  during  his  captivity,  it  is  incredible  that  he 
should  have  made  no  effort  to  escape  the  power  of  his  foes ;  if  he  had 
done  so  he  would  still,  according  to  Jahn's  hypothesis,  have  shown  him- 
self as  strong  as  ever.  The  conduct  of  the  idolatrous  Philistines  is  a 
miserable  argument.  They  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  believed  in  the 
supernatural  origin  of  his  strength,  or  in  its  connexion  with  his  vow. 
Possibly  they  may  have  been  convinced  of  its  connexion  with  the  pre- 
servation of  his  hair,  but  they  had  experienced  too  many  injuries  from 
him  not  to  use  every  precaution,  however  unnecessary  in  appearance,  to 
deprive  him  of  the  power  oi  doing  them  any  further  evil.  Besides,  they 
could  not  know  the  exact  limits  of  the  connexion  of  his  strength  with  his 
hair  ;  shaving  his  head  might  deprive  him  of  his  strength  for  the  present, 
but  a  very  short  time  might  be  sufficient  for  its  renewal.  Prudence, 
then,  required  that  they  should  immediately  take  measures  to  restrain 
him  from  its  exercise,  if  it  should  return. 

The  objectionable  features  in  this  section,  Jahn  has  copied,  almost 
servilely,  from  Eichhorn.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that,  occupying  the  post 
of  a  champion  of  revelation,  he  is  sometimes,  from  a  wish  to  attack  its 
enemies  upon  their  own  ground,  and  to  render  his  arguments  as  much  as 
possible  free  from  their  insidious  objections,  led  to  make  rash  and  un- 
justifiable concessions.     TV.] 


§  38.     First  Appendix  to  the  Book  of  Judges :  c.  xvii.  xviii. 

The  first  appendix,  c.  xvii.  xviii.,  contains  an  account  of  the  origin 
of  idolatry  among  the  Danites,  who  shortly  after  the  death  of  Joshua 
took  the  city  Leshem  or  Laish  in  Ccelo-syria,  and  furnishes  a  com- 
mentary on  Josh.  xix.  47.  Its  contents  are  as  follows  : — A  man  of 
Mount  Ephraim,  named  Micah,  returns  to  his  mother  a  sum  of  mo- 
ney that  he  had  stolen,  part  of  which  she  appropriates  to  the  making 
of  an  image.  A  travelling  Levite  is  induced  by  Micah  to  settle  in 
the  family  as  a  priest.  In  the  mean  time  certain  spies,  who  had  been 
sent  by  the  tribe  of  Dan  to  Ccelo-Syria,  passed  by  that  neighbourhood, 
and  became  acquainted  with  the  Levite's  situation  They  were  suc- 
ceeded by  600  Danites  on  their  way  to  attack  Laish,  who  seized  the 
image  and  took  the  priest  along  with  them.  Upon  the  conquest  of 
the  city,  they  set  up  the  image,  and  estabhshed  idolatry,  which  con- 
tinued there  a  considerable  time. From  the  last  words  of  the- his- 
tory, c.  xviii.  30,  31.,  which  relate  that  the  posterity  of  Jonathan  the 
grandson  of  Moses  [a]  were  priests  of  the  image  in  Laish  or  Dan, 


246    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

V^NH  nibi  nj%  until  that  region  was  devastated,  and  as  long  as  the 

house  of  God  was  in  Shiloh,  it  appears  that  the  writer  lived  posterior 
to  the  expulsion  of  the  Uanites  from  that  territory,  and  when  the  ta- 
bernacle was  not  at  Shiloh  ;  consequently,  after  the  building  of  the 
temple. [6]  This  is  confirmed  by  the  designation  of  the  date  of  the 
event,  c.  xvii.  6.  xviii.  I.,  in  those  days  there  u'as  no  king  in  Israel, 
and  every  one  did  that  which  was  right  in  his  own  eyes,  which  shows 
that  when  the  author  wrote  the  monarchy  had  been  some  time  esta- 
bHshed.[c]  But,  whatever  may  have  been  the  age  of  the  writer  or  of 
the  person  who  annexed  this  fragment  to  the  book  of  Judges,  he 
seems  to  have  used  a  very  ancient  document,  the  beginning  of  which 
had  been  worn  out  or  lost :  for  after  mentioning  Mount  Ephraim  .as 
Micah's  place  of  residence  he  enters  directly  into  the  matter,  begin- 
ning with  Micah's  confession  of  the  theft  which  he  had  committed. 
The  antiquity  of  the  document  appears  from  some  pecuhar  expres- 
sions, such  as  (xviii.  7.)  living  after  the  manner  of  the  Zidoniansj' 
i.  e.  in  ease  and  security,  and  (xvii.  10.  xviii.  19.)  '  to  be  a  father 
and  a  priest.'  Every  circumstance  of  the  narrative  moreover,  and " 
especially  the  slender  compensation  of  the  priest,  (only  ten  shekels 
of  silver  yearly,  with  food  and  clothing,  xvii.  10.,)  is  altogether  in 
character  with  remote  antiquity. 

[a)  Thus  the  author  in  both  his  works.  Yet  there  does  not  appear  to 
be  any  better  authont>  for  the  reading  than  that  the  name  of  the  Levite's 
father  was  Gershom,  together  with  some  Rabbinical  notion  respecting 
the  suspended  J^un.  The  common  reading  is  Manasseh,  and  this  has  the 
support  of  the  Sepluagint  and  the  Chaldee  Targum.  That  Moses  is  the 
reading  of  the  Vulgate  only  proves  that  the  variety  is  very  ancient.  The 
circumstances  of  the  story  render  it  very  improbable  that  the  person  who 
acts  so  prominent  a  part  should  be  the  grandson  of  Moses.  See  Patrick 
and  Le  Clerc  on  Judg.  xviii.  31.  Comp.  however,  P.  I.  }  138.  p.  160, 
and  Kennicott,  Diss,  on  the  State  of  the  Hebrew  Text,  pp.  51 — 55, 
559.     Tr-I 

\b)  This  conclusion  of  our  author  is  scarcely  warranted  by  the  expres- 
sion, "  as  long  as  the  house  of  God  was  in  Shiloh." 1)  That  the  use  of 

•  the  term  '  the  house  of  God,"  does  not  necessarily  imply  an  age  posterior 
to  the  erection  of  the  temple,  see  note  c)  to  J  25,  and  comp.  Gen-  xxviii. 

17,  22. ^)  The  continuance  of  the  ark  of  God  in  Shiloh,  it  is  well 

known,  was  interrupted  by  its  capture  by  the  Philistines,  I  Sam.  iv.,  anil 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  247 

there  is  no  evidence  that  it  was  ever  returned.  It  is  certainly  verypro- 
bable  that  the  tabernacle,  being  a  moveable  building,  and  expressly  con- 
structed to  accompany  the  ark  in  its  journeys  in  the  wilderness,  V7as  re- 
moved together  with  it,  or.  at  least,  brought  after  it.  when  its  residence 
had  been  established  at  Kirjatti  jearim.  From  the  ciri-uiuflance  of  the 
solemn  assemblies  of  the  people  being  held  at  Mizpeh  (1  Sam.  vii.  6.  x. 
17.)  and  ai  Gilgal  (1  Sam.  xi.  14.  xiii.  4,  8,  12.)  while  t-ansactions  done 
in  both  those  places  are  said  to  be  doae  '  before  the  Lord'  (I  Sam.  vii.  6. 
X.  17,  19.  xi.  15.  xii.  3.  xiii.  8,  9,  12.)  and  from  the  express  mention 
(I  Sam.  xiv.  18)  that  the  ark  was  removed  from  place  to  place,  it  seems 
likely  that  the  ark  had  no  fixed  residence  subsequently  to  its  removal 
from  Kirjath-jearim,  but  was  removed  as  the  necessities  of  the  nation 
might  require.  The  narrative  of  the  transactions  at  Nob,  (I  Sam.  xxi. 
1 — 7'.  xxii.  9 — 19.)  render  it  highly  probable  that  the  tabernacle  and 
every  thing  prescribed  by  the  Mosaic  ritual,  accompanied  it  in  its  pere- 
grinations. Certainly  the  show-bread  would  seem  to  have  been  in  its  ap- 
pointed place,  in  the  tabernacle,  without  the  veil  (Exod.  xxvi.  35.  comp. 
Mar.  ii.  26.),  and  the  only  way  to  account  for  the  presence  of  the  sword  of 
Gqli^h  (I  Sam.  xxi.  9.),  is  by  supposing  it  dedicated  as  a  monument  of 

''victory  and  an  offering  of  thanksgiving  in  '  the  house  of  God.' From 

all  this  it  appears  plain  that  at  any  time  subsequent  to  the  capture  of  the 

'  ark  by  the  Philistines,  the  expression  "  as  long  as  the  house  of  God  con- 
tinued, in  Shiloh"  might  have  been  used  with  perfect  propriety,  and,  con- 
sequently, that  it  is  no  proof  thit  this  appendix  was  not  originally  pub- 
lished, from  iriore  ancient  documents,  by  Samuel,  in  the  first  years  of  the 
reign  of  Saul. 

The  expression  y'Mi'n  niS^   1J^,  until  the  captivity  of  the  land,  has  by 

Spinoza,  Le  Clerc,  and  others,  been  considered  as  a  proof  that  this  narra- 
tive was'  not  published  until  after  the  Babylonian  captivity,  or  at  least 
until  after  that  of  Israel  by  Salmanazar  and  Esarhaddon.  But  this  rests 
upon  the  assumptions  that  the  word  T\vly .  captivity,  can  only  mean  a  de^ 

portation  of  the  inhabitants,  ami  that  when  used  in  prose  without  any  spe- 
cification of  time  or  place,  it  must  apply  to  one  of  the  great  spoliations 
made  by  the  Babylonian  or  Assyrian  princes.  Both  these  are  without 
foundation.      1)  m3K/,  a  word  as  strongly  expressive   of  captivity  as 

Pilll,  is  used  (Job  xiii.  10.)  in  a  prose  narration  to  express  '  affliction,' 

and  this  use  is  confirmed  by  other  passages.  The  conjunction  of  the 
term  with  ^1N,  land,  which  occurs  no  where  else,  and  which  would  be 

improper  in  its  strict  signification,  is  another  proof  of  the  fallaciousness  of 
this  assumption. — 2)  Nor  is  the  other  more  tenable.     That  the  expression 


248         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

*  the  captivity'  used  without  adjunct  of  time  or  place,  does,  vhen  occurring 
in  the  later  writings,  signify  the  Assyrian  or  Babylonian  captivity,  and 
especially  the  latter,  will  be  readily  granted.  The  reason  is,  that  those 
great  calamities  were  fresh  in  the  minds  of  the  author  and  his  readers, 
and  by  their  recentness  and  magnitude  swallowed  up  the  memory  of  all 
preceding  evils  of  a  similar  nature.  For  the  same  reason  an  ancient  wri- 
ter, living  a  little  after  the  complete  subjection  of  the  Israelites  to  the 
Philistines  (1  Sam  xiii.  17 — 23)  or  some  similar  calamity,  might  apply 
to  that  event  the  same  expression.  IVo  phrase  exactly  similar  to  that  in 
question  is  elsewhere  to  be  found.  It  is  therefore  much  more  reasonable 
to  suppose  it  to  allude  to  a  depopulation  of  the  territory  inhabited  by 
the  idolatrous  Danites,  during  some  of  the  many  incursions  made  upon 
the  Israelites  by  their  enemies  before  the  time  of  the  kings,  than  to  refer 
the  narrative  to  an  age  of  which  no  trace  can  be  discovered  in  it,  and 
which  was  so  long  posterior  to  the  events  recorded. 

Some  have  supposed  }>1i,<n  niSj,  caplivily  of  the  land,  to  allude  to 

the  Philistine  conquest  in  the  time  of  Eli  (I  Sam.  iv.),butit  can  scarcely 
be  supposed  that  the  eflFects  of  that  conquest  extended  so  far  north  as 
Dan.  It  is  more  prudent,  in  the  absence  of  all  historical  evidence,  to 
refer  it,  with  Jahn,  indefinitely  to  some  devastation  of  that  region,  pos- 
sibly unknown  because  unrecorded.    TV.] 

[<r)  These  passages,  however,  may  have  been  interpolated,  and  if  we 
examine  their  connexion,  it  will  appear  very  probable  that  they  have 
been  so.  For  each  immediately  follows  an  account  of  the  idolatry  of 
Micah,  so  that  it  looks  as  if  they  had  been  added  in  the  margin  by  some 
zealous  priest  or  Levite,  some  time  after  the  commencement  of  the  monar- 
chy, yet  before  the  apostacy  of  the  kings  to  idolatry,  in  order  to  account 
for  the  existence  of  such  an  evil  in  Israel.  In  c.  xviii.  1.  as  it  now  stands, 
Onn  D'D'J,  in  those  days,  is  repeated  rather  awkwardly,  whereas  if  the 

phrase  in  which  it  first  occurs  be  allowed  to  have  been  introduced  from 
the  margin,  the  connexion  of  the  second  with  the  preceding  passage  will 
be  clear  and  natural.     Tr.] 

§  39.    Tk£  second  Appendix  to  the  Book  of  Judges,  c.  xix — xxi. 

The  second  appendix  comnjences  with  the  history  of  a  family  which 
in  the  age  immediately  subsequent  to  Joshua's  death,  was  dwelling  in 
Mount  Ephraim  :  but  it  ends  with  an  account  of  a  cruel  civil  war. 
The  concubine  of  a  certain  Levite  of  Mount  Ephraim,  who  had  spent 
a  night  at  Gibeah,  of  the  tribe  of  Benjaminj  had  been  abused  by  the 
inhabitants,  even  to  death.     In  order  to  punish  such  a  flagrant  crime, 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  249 

all  the  other  tribes  flew  to  arms.  The  Benjamites  refusing  to  deliver 
up  the  offenders  to  punishment,  a  bloody  war  was  commenced  against 
them.  In  two  engagements  they  were  victorious,  but  in  the  third 
they  were  defeated,  and  the  whole  tribe  destroyed  with  the  exception 
of  GOO  men,  who  had  fled  to  the  rock  Rimmon.  These  were  after- 
wards treated  with  favour.  As  the  Israelites  had  sworn  not  to  allow 
their  daughters  to  intermarry  with  them,  400  of  them  obtained  wives 
from  among  the  young  women  of  Jabesh  Gilead,  the  males  of  which 
city  were  destroyed  by  the  Israelites,  because  they  had  not  joined  the 
war  ;  and  the  remainder  were  allowed  to  seize  the  maidens  of  Shiloh. 
while  they  were  celebrating  an  annual  festival. 

That  the  author  of  this  fragment  lived  in  an  age  much  later  than 
the  events  which  it  records,  appears  from  his  ignorance  of  the  name 
of  the  Levite,  and  of  that  of  the  city  where  he  resided  ;  and  from  his 
saying  (xx.  27)  that  the  ark  was  at  that  time  in  Shiloh,  and  (xix.  1) 

that  there  was  then  no  king  in  Israel. There  are  no  traces  of  any 

ancient  document,  from  which  this  piece  could  have  been  compiled  : 
but  it  is  quite  improbable  that  any  Hebrew  would  be  induced  to  in- 
vent a  narrative  so  disgraceful  to  his  nation  as  that  which  it  contains. 
It  is  therefore,  scarcely  necessary  to  refer  to  Hos.  ix.  9.  in  proof  of 
the  correctness  of  the  history. 

§  40.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ruth. 

A  famine  having  arisen  in  the  land  of  Israel,  at  the  period,  perhaps, 
when  the  Midianites  impoverished  the  country  during  seven  years  by 
feeding  their  flocks  on  the  crops  of  the  Israelites,  (Judg.  vi.  1 — G),[a] 
EUmelech  with  his  wife  and  two  sons,  emigrated  from  Bethlehem  to 
the  region  of  the  Moabites,  where  shortly  alter  he  died.  His  two 
sons  married  Moabitish  wives,  and  not  long  aft:er  both  of  them  died 
without  children.  Naomi,  deprived  now  of  her  husband  and  children, 
returned  to  Bethlehem,  taking  with  her  Ruth,  one  of  her  daughters- 
in-law,  whom  no  considerations  could  dissuade  from  accompanying 
her.  In  the  time  of  harvest,  Ruth  availed  herself  of  the  permission 
granted  by  the  Mosaic  law,  and  went  to  giean  in  the  field  of  Boaz,  a 
descendant  of  Naasson,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah.  The  kind  reception 
she  met  with  induced  her,  at  the  persuasion  of  her  mother-in-law,  to 
make  known  to  Boaz,  the  kinsman  of  Ehmelech,  her  claim  of  mar- 

32 


250    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

riage  by  the  right  of  a  brother-in-law,  sanctioned  by  the  Mosaic  law. 
After  a  nearer  kinsman  had  solemnly  renounced  his  right,  Boaz  mar- 
ried her,  and  she  became  the  mother  of  Obed,  the  grandfather  of 
David. 

[a)  So  Patrick,  Comm.  on  Ruth,  i.,  and  Richardson,  Pref.  to  Ruth. 
JosEPHUS,  A.  J.  V.  ix.  1.  refers  this  history  to  the  time  of  Eli,  but  is  re- 
futed by  Bkrtholdt,  Einleit.  Th.  V.  S.  2349.  Moldenhauer,  (la- 
trod,  ad  Lib.  V.  et  N.  T.  p.  43)  after  some  Jewish  writers,  assigns  it  to 
the  time  of  Ehud :  Ussher  to  that  of  Shamgar.  Horjv£,  lalrod.  IV.  38. 
ed.  4th.     Tr.] 

§41.     Age  of  the  Book  of  Ruth. 

From  the  addition  of  the  genealogy  of  the  royal  line  it  appears  that 
the  author  lived,  not  before  David,  but  sometime  after  him ;  and  in- 
deed it  is  plain  that  he  wrote  in  an  age  comparatively  modern  :  for, 
1)  the  expression  'when  the  judges  ruled,'  (i.  1)  which  marks  the 
period  when  the  event  occurred,  shows  that  in  the  writer's  day-  kings 
had  already  been  reigning  for  a  considerable  time. — 2)  The  explana- 
tion of  the  rite,  formerly  in  use,  of  confirming  a  bargain  by  the  delive- 
ry of  the  shoe  of  one  of  the  parties  (iv.  7),  which  in  the  author's  time 
had  become  obsolete  ;  and  his  ignorance  of  the  name  of  the  nearer 
kinsman,  who  is  merely  designated    as   ''jo'73  "'J'7i3,  such   an   one, 

strengthens  the  above  proof — 3)  The  Chaldee  words  with  which  the 
language  is  interspersed,[a]  intimate  that  the  last  period  of  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  is  the  earliest  age  to  which  the  book  can  be  assigned. 

[a)  Thus  XliO  occurs  for  T\'yO,  i.  20 ;  Jod  is  used  in  the  second  person 

feminine,  T\'0^>  and  '^^T,  iii.  3.,  and  ^r\'Z2^,  iii.  4.     As  however,  in 

other  respects  the  language  is  tolerably  pure,  these  few  Chaldaisms  may 
have  arisen  from  negligence  in  the  transcribers ;  particularly  as  in  iv.'S. 
the  second  person  masculine  has  also  a  Jod^  ('n'Jp)  plainly  from  the  er- 
ror of  the  copyist,  and  elsewhere  the  book  exhibits  much  variety  of  read- 
ing. It  is  not  possible,  therefore,  to  determine  its  date  with  certainty.] 
■ [De  Wette  adds  as  instances  of  Chaldaisms ;  \i,]},  c.  i.  15.  (on  which, 

however,  see  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad.  Lex.  Heb.  No.  1819);  p3n,  i.  14. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  251 

ij.  8, 21.  (which  occurs  in  Gen.  ii.  24.  xix.  19.)  ;  03^,  ii.  14. ;  and   the 

use  of  the  suffix  D  instead  of  J,  i.  8,  9,  11,  13.  Comp.  also  the  similar 
phrases  in  Ruth  i.  17.  and  I  Sam.  iii.  17.  xiv.  44.  I  Ki.  ii.  23.  II  Ki.  vi. 
31.,  and  in  Ruth  iv.  4.  and  I  Sam.  ix.  15.  xx.  2,  12.     TV.] 

§  42,     The  Book  of  Ruth  is  worthy  of  credence. 

That  the  book  is  taken  from  ancient  records,  perhaps  genealogies, 
may  be  inferred  from  the  following  circumstances. — 1)  The  retention 
of  the  obsolete  term  S«JD  to  express  the  second  nearest  kinsman,  c. 

ii.  20. — 2)  The  omission  of  the  nearest  kinsman's  name,  probably 
because  it  was  wanting  in  the  document. — 3)  The  accurate  agree- 
ment of  the  speech  of  Ruth  and  of  the  dialogue  between  Boaz  and 
the  other  kinsman,  with  the  characters  of  the  persons,  which  is  such 
as  to  preclude  all  idea  of  their  being  fictitious. 

That  the  author  used  these  documents  with  integrity,  is  proved  ; 
1)  by  the  fact  that  he  does  not  flatter  the  royal  family,  but  candidly 
relates  its  descent  from  a  Moabitish  mother,  who  had  been  reduced 
to  extreme  poverty. — 2)  The  good  disposition  of  Boaz  is  proved  by 
Ms  marrying  a  widow  in  such  circumstances,  whom  her  nearer  kins- 
man had  rejected,  and  to  whom  the  requisition  of  the  law  did  not 
oblige  him  to  unite  himself :  so  that  this  view  of  his  character  cannot 
be  the  author's  invention. — 3)  All  the  circumstances  incidentally 
mentioned  are  in  character  with  that  age.  Poverty,  for  instance, 
does  not  expose  to  contempt ;  the  courts  of  justice  are  held  in  the 
gate  ;  a  bargain  is  confirmed  by  the  delivery  of  a  shoe,  [a] 

The  genealogy  from  Naasson  to  David,  which  contains  only  five 
generations  in  five  hundred  years,  does  not  cause  any  difficulty,  since 
the  orientals  in  those  genealogies  in  which  they  do  not  insert  the 
chronology  of  the  succession,  omit  generations  at  pleasure,  being 
only  solicitous  to  trace  up  the  posterity  to  its  true  source.  [6] 

[a)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  193.,  defends  the  authority  of  the  book  of 
Ruth,  against  Bertholdt,  who  imagined  that  it  was  a  fictitious  narra- 
tive designed  to  recommend  hospitality,  and  the  honourable  performance 
of  engagements.     Einleit.  Th.  V.  S.  2337.  ff.     Tr.] 

[b)  See  EiCHHOBN  Monumenta  Antiquissimse  Historiae  Araborum. 
3  7.  p.  18.    Tr.] 


252  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH   BOOK 

§  43.     The  age  of  the  Judges  was  not  heroic. 

If  by  a  heroic  age,  which  many  suppose  that  of  the  Judges  to  have 
been,  we  are  to  understand  an  age  in  which  heroes  arise  and  defend 
their  country  ;  the  name  is  inapplicable  to  that  of  the  Judges.  For 
those  who  voluntarily  offered  themselves  were  very  few.  Barak,  on 
the  contrary,  was  summoned  l-y  Deborah,  a  woman,  and  displayed  no 
great  degree  of  courage.  Gideon  though  called  by  God,  obeyed  with 
tardy  reluctance.  Jephthah,  being  solicited  by  an  embassy,  not 
merely  to  conduct  the  war,  but  also  to  take  upon  him  the  govern- 
ment, did  not  consent  without  delay.  Tola,  Jair.  Ibzan,  Elon,  and 
Abdon,  not  to  mention   Eli  and  Samuel,  were  not  heroes,  but  civil 

rulers. If  that  is  a  heroic  age,  which  is  disturbed  with  perpetual 

wars  ;  the  expression  is  still  less  appropriate  to  the  age  of  the  Judges  : 
for  there  were  long  intervals  of  tranquillity,  Judg.  iii.  11,  30.  v.  31. 
viii.  28.  ;  and  all  the  wars  which  took  place  during  this  period  of  450 
years,  occupied  only  111,  hardly  a  fourth  part  of  the  whole,  and  were 

carried  on  only  by  particular  tribes. If,  lastly,  that  age  be  called 

heroic,  which  is  rude,  and  rough,  and  fierce,  destitute  of  letters,  po- 
liteness and  morals  ;  in  this  sense  also  is  the  term  inappropriate  to 
the  age  of  the  Judges.  For  although  it  does  indeed  exhibit  some  ex- 
amples of  harshness  and  cruelty  to  enemies  they  are  just  such  as  oc- 
cur in  David's  age,  and  are  certainly  compensated  by  the  friendly 
state  of  intercourse  which  was  granted  to  the  Canaanites,  by  the 
high  degree  of  moral  character  which  gave  rise  to  the  destructive  war 
against  the  Benjamites,  by  the  well  turned  reply  which  Gideon's  fa- 
ther made  to  his  fellow  citizens  for  his  son,  by  Gideon's  magnani- 
mous refusal  of  the  kingdom  that  God  alone  might  be  king  of  the 
Hebrews,  by  the  humane  and  mild  deportment  of  Boaz,  by  the  courts' 
being  held  without  interruption  in  the  gates  of  the  cities ;  and  by 
Jephthah's  treating  of  peace  before  he  undertook  to  go  to  war. 
These  are  manifest  proofs  of  an  age  of  some  cultivation,  and  the  state 
of  letters  is  illustrated  by  the  song  of  Deborah  and  the  parable  of  Jo- 
tham.  If  the  period  of  the  Judges  had  been  so  rude  as  some  repre- 
sent it,  the  nation  could  not  possibly  have  risen  in  so  short  a  space  of 
time  to  the  degree  of  refinement  and  polish  and  cultivation  that  we 
find  under  the  reign  of  David. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  253 


CHAPTER  IV. 


op   THE    BOOKS    OF   SAMUEL,    KINGS,    AND   CHRONICLES, 


§  44.     Contents  of  the  BooTcs  of  Samuel  and  Kings. 

The  books  of  Samuel  begin  with  an  account  of  the  conception^ 
infancy,  and  prophetic  and  civil  offices  of  him  whose  name  they  bear  ; 
I  Sam.  i.  I — vii.  17. They  proceed  to  relate  the  change  of  go- 
vernment, the  inauguration  of  Saul  as  king,  and  his  official  acts,  which 
not  corresponding  with  the  commands  of  the  Divine  Ruler  it  was 
announced  to  him  that  his  kingdom  should  devolve  upon  another  : 

I  Sam.  viii.  1 — xiv.  52. It  is  mentioned   also  that   Samuel,  by  a 

symbolical  action,  promised  the  kingdom  to  David,  (the  youngest  son 
of  Jesse,  a  citizen  of  Bethlehem,)  who  was  subsequently  called  to 
court  in  order  to  soothe  by  his  music  the  mind  of  Saul,  who  was  ren- 
dered insane  by  the  knowledge  of  his  approaching  downfal.  After 
David's  victory  over  Goliath,  the  acclamations  of  the  women  who 
congratulate  him  on  that  event  induce  Saul  to  suspect  that  he  is  the 
person  on  whom  the  kingdom  is  about  to  devolve.  Saul  ende  vours 
therefore  to  destroy  him,  and  persecutes  him  to  such  a  degree  that  he 

is  obliged  to  take  refuge   in  Phihstia :   I  ^^am.  xv.  1 — xxxi.   13. 

Saul  is  slain  in  a  battle  with  the  Philistines,  and  David  elect  d  king 
by  the  tribe  of  Judah.  Through  the  influence  of  Abner  the  other 
eleven  tribes  adhere  to  Ishbosheth  the  son  of  Saul,  and  on  his  being 
slain  by  some  of  his  own  party  in  the  second  year  of  hi  reign,  they 
continue  without  a  king,  until  at  last,  in  the  seventh  year  from  the 
death  of  Saul,  they  subuiit  to  David.  He  having  taken  the  fortress 
of  Jerusalem,  transfers  the  royal  residence  from  Hebron  to  Zion  and 
removes  thither  also  the  ark  of  the  covenant.     He  is  prohibited  from 


254         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

carrying  into  effect  his  intention,  but,  on  that  occasion,  receives  from 
God,  through  the  prophet  Nathan,  a  promise  that  the  kingdom  shall 
be  perpetual  in  his  family.  II  Sam.  i.  1 — vii.  29.  Then  follows  a 
succinct  history  of  the  reign  of  David. Some  of  his  most  remarka- 
ble military  enterprises  are  stated,  and  his  chief  civil  officers  are 
mentioned  by  name ;  II  Sam.  viii.  This  is  followed  by  his  kind 
treatment  of  Mephil  osheth  the  son  of  his  friend  Jonathan  ;  II  Sam.  ix. 
Then  the  war  against  the  Ammonites  is  relat  d,  which  was  underta- 
ken to  avenge  disgrace  which  had  been  been  offered,  in  contempt  of 
the  law  of  nation?,  to  David's  kind  embassage.  During  this  war  the 
criminal  connexion  of  David  with  Bathsheba  took  place,  and  his  suf- 
fering Uriah  to  be  killed  ;  II  Sam.  x.  1 — xi.  27.  This  led  to  Nathan's 
parable  and  denunciation  of  punishment,  c.  xii.  the  account  of  which 
immediately  follows,  viz.  the  affair  of  Tamar  and  Amnon,  the  murder 
of  Amnon  by  Absalom,  the  revolt  of  Absalom  and  his  treatment  of 
David's  concubines.  This  disgraceful  conduct  of  his  own  family 
must  have  been  felt  the  more  keenly  by  the  sensitive  and  pious  father, 
from  his  consciousness  that  his  own  criminality  had  afforded  his  chil- 
dren an  example.  David's  restoration  and  Absalom's  death,  con- 
clude the  whole  history  ;  II  Sam.  xiii.  1 — xx.  26. 

This  history  is  followed  by  an  appendix  containing  six  particulars.- 

1)  The  famine,   on  account  of  the   unpunished  murders  which 

some  of  Sajl's  family  had   committed   on   the   Gibeonites  ;  II  Sam. 

xxi.  1 — 14 2)  An  account  of  some  wars  of  David  ;  v.  15 — 22, 

3)   David's  Epinicium,  the  sa^ne  as  in   Ps.  xviii.;   II  Sam.  xxii. 

4)  A  later  poem  of  David,  which  is  not  to  be  met  with  in  the 

Psalms;   II  Sam.  xxiii.    1 — 7. 5)    A   list    of  David's   particular 

heroes  ;  w.  8 — 39. 6)    An  account  of  the  numbering  of  the  peo- 
ple and  of  the  consequent  punishment   by  pestilence  ;  II  Sam.  xxiv. 

The  first  book  of  Kings  commences  with  an  account  of  the  abdica- 
tion of  the  throne  by  David  in  his  old  age  when  he  had  reigned  forty 
years  and  six  months,  in  favour  of  his  son  Solomon.  Then  follows 
the  history  of  the  reign  of  Solomon  during  forty  years,  including  a 
particular  account  of  the  building  of  the  temple,  692  years  after  the 
exode^and  1011  before  Christ,  of  Solomon's  extraordinary  wisdom, 
and  of  his  subsequent  idolatry.  Upon  his  death  the  division  of  the 
kingdom  took  place,  628  years  after  the  Exode,  and  975  before 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  255 

Christ.  I  Ki.  i.  1 — xii.  33. The  histories  of  the  kingdoms  of  Judah 

and  Israel  during  253  years  are  given  in  connexion  in  I  Ki.  xiii.  1 — II 
Ki.  xvii.  23.  and  are  followed,  II  Ki.  xviii.  1: — xxv.  30.,  by  the  re- 
mainder of  the  history  of  Judah  during  135  years.[a] 

[a)  The  kingdom  of  Israel  lasted  253  years,  under  eighteen  or  twenty 
princes,  from  Jeroboam  I.  to  Hoshea,  Ihe  greater  part  of  whom  perished 
in  insurrections.  They  were  all  worsluppers  of  the  golden  calves,  and 
some  of  them,  among  whom  Ahab,  with  his  wife  Jez<^bel,  was  the  chief, 
gross  idolaters.  Two  hundred  and  thirty-five  years  after  the  separation, 
and  740  before  Christ,  Galilee  and  the  country  on  the  other  side  of  Jor- 
dan were  conquered  by  Tiglath-pileser,  and  eighteen  years  after,  upon 
the  rebellion  of  Hoshea  against  the  Assyrians,  were  attacked  by  Salma- 
nassar,  and  the  principal  citizens,  soldiers,  and  artizans  transplanted  to 
Assyria  and  Calach  on  the  river  Chabor  in  Gozan,  east  of  the  Tigris, 
and  into  the  cities  of  Media.  To  supply  the  depopulated  country,  colo- 
nies from  Babylon,  Cutha,  Ava,  Hamath,  and  Sepharvaim,  were  introdu- 
ced ;  who,  intermingling  with  the  Israelites  who  had  remained  in  the 
country,  were  afterwards  known  by  the  name  of  Samaritans. 

As  the  kingdom  of  Judah  did  not  experience  so  many  insurrfctioni  as 
that  of  Israel,  it  was  governed  during  a  period  of  387  years,  by  no  more 
than  twenty  kings,  eight  of  whom  were  sincere  worshippers  of  God,  and 
twelve  idolaters.  It  was  subjected  and  made  tributary  by  Nebuchadnez- 
zer,  369  years  after  the  division,  and  606  before  Christ,  when  the  seventy 
years  of  the  captivity  began.  Upon  the  revolt  of  Zedekiah,  18  years 
after,  it  was  entirely  destroyed,  and  the  people  removed  to  the  river 
Chabor  or  Chaboros,  and  to  Babylonia.] 

§  45,     The  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  are  not  coeval  idth  the  tran- 
sactions which  they  record. 

That  these  books  are  not  annals  contemporaneous  with  the  events 
recorded,  appears;  1)  ftora  the  style  and  tenor  of  narration,  which, 
although  indeed  it  is  not  exactly  the  same  throughout,  is  yet  not  so 
varied  as  it  must  have  been,  had  the  books  been  the  productions  of 
different  authors  writing  in  successive  periods  :  2)  from  the  numer- 
ous Chaldaisms  which  occur  :[a]  3)  from  the  explanations  of  obso- 
lete customs  and  forms  of  speech,  which  are  signs  of  an  age  much 
later  than  that  of  the  events  recorded ;  comp.  I  Sam  ix.  9.  II  Sam.  xiii. 
18  :  4)  from  the  more  recent  occurrences  which  are  expressly  men- 
tioned, such  as  that '  Ziklag  appertaineth  to  the  kings  of  Judah  even  to 


256         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

this  day,'  I  Sam.  xxvii.  6.,  which  could  not  have  been  written  before 
the  division  of  the  kingdom  :  [6]  5)  from  the  reader's  being  referred  to 
other  books  by  which  the  author  declares  himself  to  have  lived  some 
considerable  time  after  the  transactions  which  he  relates,  [c] 

[a)  Thus  inX  is  used  for  the  article  in  I  Sam.  i.  1.  xxv.  14  ;    HinD 

occurs  for  provinces  in  I  Ki.  xx.  14 — 17  ;  O'JDli!'  for  TJ'JDK',  in  II  Ki-  iv. 

3 ;  ]"!£'>   for  CH"^,  in  II  Ki.  xi.  13.     The  N  is  often  omitted,  and  the 

Babylonian  names  of  the  months  are  used.  See  I  Ki.  vi.  1,  37,  38. 
viii.  2.] 

[6)  Comp.  also  I  Sam.  v.  5.  x  12.  xxx.  25.  II  Sam.  vi.  8  1  Ki.  iii.  2. 
ix.  13,21.  X.  12,  21.  xii  19.  xiii.  32  (comp.  xvi.  24).  34.  xxii.  47  (comp. 
II  Ki.  viii.  20.)  II  Ki.  ii.  22.  viii.  22.  x.  27,  32.  xiv.  7.  xvi.  6.  xvii.  23, 
34,  41.  xviii.  5.  xxiii.  25.     Tr.] 

[c)  Comp.  II  Sam.  i.  18.  I  Ki.  xi.  41.  xiv  19,  29.  xv.  7,  23.  31.  xvi.  5, 

14,  20.  27.  xxii.  39,45.  II  Ki.  i.  18.  viii.  23.  x.  34.  xii.  19.  xiii.  8,  12.  xiv. 

15,  18.  28.  XV.  6,  11,  15,  21, 26,  31,  36  xvi.  19.  xx.  20.  xxi-  17,  25.  xxiii. 
28.  xxiv.  5.   Tr] 

§  46.     The  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  were  written  by  the  same 

author. 

That  the  two  books  of  Samuel  were  considered  by  the  ancient  Jews 
as  a  single  book,  and  in  like  manner  the  two  books  of  Kings,  is  attest- 
ed by  Jerome,  Origen,  Melito  bishop  of  Sardis,  and  Flavins  Jose- 
phus:[a]  and  in  fact  there  is  an  unbroken  connexion  between  the 
first  and  second  books  of  Samuel,  and  also  between  the  first  and  se- 
cond books  of  Kings.  The  Alexandrine  version,  followed  by  Jerome 
in  the  Vulgate  numbers  them  as  four  books,  and  calls  them  all  books 
of  Kings  ;  whence  it  appears  that  originally  the  whole  four  were 
undivided,  and  formed  a  single  work  ;  which  is  confirmed  by  the  close 
connexion  of  the  socon-.i  book  of  Sanmel  with  the  first  of  Kings. 
However  this  may  be,  1)  the  perfect  similarity  of  plan  in  all  the  lour 
books  shows  them  to  be  the  productioM  of  one  author,  whose  object 
was  to  give  a  succinct  history  of  the  Hebrew  monarchy  as  it  existed 
under  the  direction  of  its  Supreme  King  Jehovah.  Hence  he  begins 
with  Samuel,  under  whom  the  form  of  govt- rntnent  was  changed  to  a 
monarchy  while  the  circumstances  of  the  event  aftbrd  occasion  to  ex- 


QF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


251 


Jiibit  the  relation  of  the  human  monarch  to  the  King  Jehovah.  When 
the  kingdom  is  promised  and  at  last  committed  to  David,  the  whole 
transaction  again  exhibits  the  same  relation,  and  in  all  the  history  of 
David,  the  continual  aim  of  the  author  is  to  show  that  during  the 
whole  course  of  his  government,  that  monarch  had  constant  regard  to 
the  King  Jehovah,  and  in  this  respect  furnished  an  example  for  the 
imitation  of  his  successors.  Accordingly,  he  praises  or  censures 
every  king,  in  proportion  as  he  imitated,  or  disregarded,  the  example 
of  his  predecessor  David.  Even  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel  he  follows 
the  same  plan,  comparing  the  kings  respectively  with  the  first  of  that 
monarchy,  Jeroboam,  whose  bad  example  they  imitated,  and  even 

surpassed. He  refers  every  thing  to  the  law  of  Moses,  not  indeed 

as  often  as  is  done  in  the  book  of  Joshua,  but  oftener  than  in  the  book 
of  Judges.  [&] He  everywhere  observes  the  same  method  of  suc- 
cinct narration^  especially  with  respect  to  the  wars,  which  he  mentions 
cursorily,  while,  on  the  contrary,  his  account  of  those  things  which 
related  to  the  theocracy,  is  everywhere  more  diffuse. The  con- 
clusion of  the  second  book  of  Kings  manifests,  by  its  brevity,  an  author 

hastening  to  the  end  of  a  long  labour. Lastly,  fragments  occur  in 

n  Ki.  iv.  1 — viii.  15,  just  as  they  do  in  H  Sam.  xxi — xxiv  ;  so  that 

the  author's  identity  is  eveiywhere  evident,  [c] 2)     The  diversity 

of  style  and  language  is  not  so  great  as  might  be  expected  from  a  plu- 
rality of  authors.  That  which  is  observable,  arises  from  the  records 
written  by  different  persons,  and  almost  verbally  compiled  by  our  au- 
thor. The  only  difference  between  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings 
is,  that  in  the  latter,  books  are  cited,  in  which  the  reader  may  seek 
for  further  information,  but  in  the  former  no  such  references  occur. 
But  if  we  observe  that  the  books  of  Samuel  generally  draw  more 
largely  from  foreign  sources,  the  reason  is  plain,  why  the  author 
thought  it  unnecessary  to  refer  to  other  books.  This  defect,  if  it  be 
a  defect,  is  supplied  by  the  author  of  Chronicles  ;  I  Chron.  xxix. 
29.[d] 

[a)  EvsEB.  Ecc.  Hist.  IV:  xxvi.  VI.  xxr.  Hierontm.  Prolog. 
Galeat.  Joseph,  coat.  Ap.  Lib.  I.  c.  viii.  The  division  into  two  books 
has  been  generally  introduced  into  the  Hebrew  Bibles  since  the  editions 
•of  BoAiBERG,  in  the  commencement  of  the  sixteenth  century.     TV.] 

33 


258         PARTICULAR    liNTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

[b)  This  assertion  is  scarcely  capable  of  proof.  In  the  books  of  Samuel 
7iot  one  reference  is  made  by  the  historian  to  the  law  of  Moses.  In  the 
books  of  Kings  only  the  following  occur:  II  Ki.  x.  31.  xiv.  6.  xvii.  7 — 19, 

35 — 40.  xviii.  6,  12.  xxiii.  3,  25. The  difference  between  the  books  of 

Samuel  and  those  of  Kings  in  this  respect,  is  used  by  De  Wette  aud  others 
as  an  argument  in  proof  of  a  different  origin.     TrJ] 

[c)  The  uninterrupted  continuation  of  the  history  through  the  books 
of  Samuel  and  Kings  has  been  adduced  in  proof  of  the  unity  of  the  work. 
De  Wette  objects  that  if  the  history  be  uninterrupted,  the  narration  is 
not,  since  the  appendices,  II  Sam.  xxi — xxiv.,  seem  to  show  that  the  work 
to  which  they  are  affixed  is  complete.     TV.] 

[rf)  De  Wette  (Eiuleit.  5  186.)  maintains  that  the  separate  origin 
of  the  Books  of  Kings  is  proved  by  the  following  particulars  in  which 
they  differ  from  the  Books  of  Samuel :  1)  the  existence  of  proofs  of  an 
origin  during  the  captivity  throughout  the  work ;  2)  the  frequent  refer- 
ence to  the  Pentateuch  ;  3)  the  disapprobation  of  the  liberty  of  religious 
worship ;  4)  the  difference  of  style  ;  5)  the  citation  of  authorities  ;  and 
6)  the  minuteness  of  the  chronology.  He,  however,  gives  no  proof  of 
his  assertion.     TV.] 

§  47.     Age  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings.  • 

If  these  four  books  are  the  production  of  one  author,  they  could 
not  have  been  conunenced  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  which 
is  briefly  related  in  the  conclusion ;  nor  could  they  have  been  pub- 
lished before  the  liberation  of  king  Jehoiachin  from  prison,  mentioned 
II  Ki.  XXV.  27 — 30,  (which  happened  in  the  26th  year  after  that 
event,*)  nor  long  after  it,  since  the  death  of  Jehoiachin,  who  could 
not  have  lived  long  after,  since  he  was  then  an  old  man,  is  not  re- 
corded. In  confirmation  of  this  opinion  respecting  the  date  of  these 
books,  it  maybe  observed,  that  the  author,  by  his  description  of  the 
temple,  brief  as  it  is,  shows  that  he  had  seen  it  before  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  ;  he  could  not  therefore  have  lived  later  than  the 
date  assigned.  Who  he  was,  we  have  no  means  of  ascertaining.  The 
passage.  I  Chron.  xxix.  29.,  which  mentions  that  Samuel,  Nathan, 
and  Gad,  wrote  the  history  of  David  [a],  relates  to  annals  of  the  kmg- 

*  [So  Jahn  in  his  Latin  work.  In  the  German  it  is  '  the  19th '  which  is  evidently 
erroneous.  Prideaux  places  Jehoiachin's  liberation  in  the  28th  year  after  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jemsalem.     Tr.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  259 

dom  contemporary  with  the  events  related,  from  which  works  these 
books  were  compiled.  [6]  Nor  can  any  thing  be  brought  to  show 
that  Jeremiah  or  Ezra  was  the  author,  [c] 

[a)  For  an  account  and  attempt  at  defence  of  the  common  opinion 
which  refers  this  passage  to  the  books  of  Samuel,  see  Horne,  Introd.  IV. 
p.  40.  s.     TV.] 

[b)  So  also  other  references  which  occur  in  Chronicles  do  not  relate 
to  our  books  of  Kings.     See  II  Chron.  is.  29.  xii.  15.  xiii.  22.     TV.] 

[c)  For  a  statement  of  the  argument  in  favour  of  Ezra's  being  the 
compiler  of  the  books  of  Kings,  see  Horne,  Introd.  IV.  47.  s.  The  ma- 
jority of  the  Jews  assert  them  to  be  the  work  of  Jeremiah.  Carpzov, 
Introd.  p.  243.  The  difference  of  style,  and  the  superficial  notice  of  his 
times,  are  in  contradiction  to  this  opinion.  Comp.  also  II  Ki,  xxiv.  1,  6, 
with  Jer.  xxii.  19.     TV.] 

§  48.     Contents  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles. 

In  the  books  of  Chronicles  or  annals  (D'D»n  n^l)  the  foliowiag 

particulars  are  contained.  1)1  Chron.  i — ix.  consists  of  a  series  of 
genealogies,  the  more  ancient  of  which  are  so  obscure  as  to  be  hardly 
intelligible  unless  collated  with  the  Pentateuch  ;  the  more  modern 
are  the  most  perspicuous.  Agreeably  to  ancient  usage  in  genealo- 
gies, historical  facts  worthy  of  observation  are  interspersed  through- 
out the  whole. [a]  2)  I  Chron.  x.  1 — II  Chron.  ix,  31,  contains  ac- 
counts relating  to  David  and  Solomon,  which  in  part  are  the  same  as 
those  contained  in  the  books  of  Samuel  and  the  first  chapters  of  the 
first  book  of  Kings,  although  there  are  many  additions,  particularly 
on  subjects  relating  to  the  worship  of  God.  [6]  3)  II  Chron.  x — 
xxxvi.  affords  a  succinct  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  and  many 
matters,  especially  with  respect  to  the  various  reformations  and  to 
divine  worship,  which  are  not  in  the  books  of  Kings,  [c]  The  king- 
dom of  Israel  is  not  mentioned,  except  when  it  becomes  connected 
with  the  liistory  of  that  of  Judah. 

[o)  These  genealogical  tables  are  exceedingly  brief.  Nothing  is  to  be 
found  of  the  tribe  of  Dan.  That  of  Benjamin  is  twice  introduced, 
I  Chron.  vii.  6 — 12.  and  viii.    The  genealogies  of  the  priests  and  Le- 


'260         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOK 

vites  are  given  most  in  detail,  and  terminate  with  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem, I  Chron.  v.  27—40.  vi.  1 — 32.  (vi.  1 — 47.)  They  are  very  far 
from  being  complete.  Even  those  of  the  high  priests,  extending  through 
1000  years,  comprehend  only  twenty-two  successions  where  thirty  might 
be  expected,  I  Chron.  v.  27 — 40.  vi.  1—14.  Those  of  the  tribe  of  Ju- 
dah  are  pretty  copious,  I  Chron.  ii.  iv.  1 — 23.,  and  the  register  of  David's 
descendants  runs  down  to  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  before  Christ ; 
I  Chron.  iii.  All  these  tables  relate  to  distinguished  families  and  indi- 
viduals. They  contain  occasionally  most  important  historical  notices, 
which  prove  that  in  the  original  tables  historical  matters  were  here  and 
there  introduced.  See  I  Chron.  iv.  18,  22,  23,  38—43.  v.  10—26. 
vii.  20—24.] 

[6)  The  death  only  of  Saul  is  mentioned,  I  Chron.  x.  David's  seven 
years'  government  of  Judah,  of  which  we  read  in  II  Sam.  i — iv.  is  entirely 
omitted,  and  the  submission  of  the  eleven  tribes,  and  the  capture  of  the 
citadel  of  Jerusalem,  with  some  additional  matter,  immediately  introdu- 
ced, I  Chron.  xi.  Then  follow  accounts  of  men  who  had  joined  David 
during  Saul's  persecution,  and  who  afterwards  went  to  aid  him  at  He- 
bron, c.  xii. ;  also,  accounts  of  the  attempt  to  take  the  ark  to  Zion, 
c.  xiii.;  of  David's  friendship  with  Hiram,  king  of  Tyre  ;  of  two  success- 
ful attacks  upon  the  Philistines,  c.  xiv.;  and  of  the  bringing  the  ark  into 
the  citadel  of  Zion,  c.  xv.  xvi.  The  promise  which  was  made  to  David 
in  consequence  of  his  intention^  to  build  a  temple,  and  the  narrative  of 
his  victories  over  various  peoples,  and  of  the  war  of  vengeance  which  he 
undertook  against  the  Ammonites,  are  related  almost  in  the  same  words 
with  the  parallel  accounts  in   Samuel :   comp.   c.  xvii.  xviii.  xix.  xx. 

1 — 3.  with  II  Sam.  vii.  viii.  x.  xii.  26 — 32. These  are  followed  by 

certain  occurrences  which  took  place  during  different  wars,  and  by  the 
numbering  of  the  army,  c.  xxi.  Then  come  additional  circumstances  of 
David's  life,  namely,  his  commission  to  Solomon  to  build  the  temple, 
c.  xxii ;  his  division  of  the  Levites  and  priests,  c.  xxiii — xxv.,  with  some 
of  their  services,  c.  xxvi ;  also  the  distribution  of  the  Israelites  in  refer- 
ence to  military  service,  c.  xxvii ;  the  public  recognition  of  Solomon  as 
his  successor,  accompanied  by  a  renewed  command  to  build  a  temple, 
and  an  account  of  the  presents  offered  by  himself  and  the  most  distin- 
guished Hebrews,  c.  xxviii.  xxix.  In  II  Chron.  i — is.,,  the  history  of 
Solomon  is  almost  throughout  in  unison  with  that  in  I  Ki.  iii — ^xi.] 

[c)  Thus  the  reformation  under  Jehoshaphat,  II  Chron.  xvii — ^xx., 
that  under  Hezekiah,  c.  xxix — xxxii.,  that  under  Manasseh,  c.  xxxiii., 
and  that  under  Josiah,  c.  xxxiv.  xxxv.,  are  described  with  more  particu- 
larity than  in  the  parallel  places  in  Kings.  See  I  Ki.  xxii.  41—46.  II  Ki. 
sviii— XX.  xxi.  1—18.  xxii.  1— xxiii.  30.1 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  261 

§  49,     Design  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles. 

From  the  preceding  sketch  of  the  contents  of  these  books,  it  is 
evident  that  the  author  has  written  an  epitome  of  the  history  of  the 
Hebrews  down  to  the  end  of  the  captivity,  yet  with  the  determina- 
tion not  to  touch  on  the  history  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  unless 
where  that  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  required  it.  He  suppUes  many 
things  which  had  been  omitted  in  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings,  and 
omits  others  which  had  been  mentioned  in  those  books.  Whether 
he  had  read  them  or  not  is  uncertain,  [a]  The  choice  of  subjects  to 
be  related  shows  that  his  intention  was  to  point  out  to  the  Hebrews 
when  returning  to  their  country  their  real  ancestry,  with  the  posses- 
sions and  residences  of  their  famiUes,  and  to  instruct  them  in  the 
manner  in  which  divine  worship  should  be  restored.*  Hence  in  the 
genealogies  he  continually  mentions  the  situation  and  residence  of 
each  family,  I  Chron.  ii.  23,  53.  iv.  3,  12,  14,  17,  18.  ss.,  28—33. 
V.  8,  11 — 17.  vi.  39 — 66.  vii.  28.  s.  ix.  1 — 45  ;  hence  also  he  gives 
the  genealogy  of  the  Levites  and  priests  at  greater  length  ;  and 
hence,  lastly,  he  narrates  with  the  more  particularity,  not  only  the 
order  of  divine  worship  as  established  by  David  and  Solomon,  but 
also  the  reformations  which  followed  at  different  periods. 

[a)  Lb  Clerc  thinks  it  probable  that  he  had  not :  Diss,  de  Script. 
Libror.  Historicor.     But  see  note  a)  to  §  51.     TV.] 

§  50.     Age  of  the  Books  of  Chronicles. 

It  appears  from  the  design  of  the  writer,  that  these  books  were 
written  not  long  after  the  time  of  the  captivity.  With  this  date 
agree  the  several  peculiarities  wlaich  may  be  observed  in  them,  such 
as  the  Chaldean  orthography  ;  the  frequency  of  the  letters  called 
matres  lectionis[d] ;  the  introduction  of  recent  words  and  objects, 
especially  those  of  Persian  origin,  for  instance,  y^3,  cotton,  m'3,  a 


*  This  design,  which  is  obTions  to  every  attentive  reader,  was  not  observed  by  De 
Wette,  and  hence  he  charges  the  author  with  the  flagrant  crime  of  imposture,  as  though, 
being  himself  a  Levite  or  a  priest,  he  had  invented  those  matters  which  relate  to 
divine  worship,  to  the  Levites,  and  to  the  priests.  But  that  he  candidly  rcconafs 
facts,  and  does  not  add  from  his  own  invention,  will  appear  here-^fter. 


262         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

palace,  B'lT'nn,  to  recount  a  genealogy ;  the  mention  of  ancient  and 

modern  cubits,  II  Chron.  iii.  3.,  and  of  D"'32"nN,  Darics,  a  Persian 

gold  coin-  I  Chron.  xxix.  7. It  is  impossible  to  determine  the  age 

of  these  books  more  accurately  than  this,  for  want  of  evidence. 
Still  less  can  we  ascertain  who  was  the  author.  They  who  have 
concluded  from  the  two  last  verses  of  the  second  book,  which  are 
the  same  as  the  first  two  of  Ezra,  that  the  books  of  Chronicles  are 
the  work  of  Ezra[6],  have  not  attended  to  the  difference  of  style 
and  manner  of  narration.  Some  have  placed  the  writer  of  these 
books  in  the  times  of  Darius  Codomannus  or  Alexander  the  Great, 
appealing  to  the  genealogy,  I  Chron.  iii.  19 — 24  :  but  this  modern 
date  is  repugnant  to  the  style  and  design  of  the  books,  so  that  the 
genealogy  referred  to  must  be  considered  as  appended  by  a  more 
modern  hand,  [c] 

[o)  Thus  David  is  not  written    nn,  but  always    T'n  ;  Jerusalem 

not  dSb'IT,  but  D'vtyiT.     Aramsean  orthography  occurs,  such  as  ^/ep/6 

at  the  end  of  words  instead  of  fiie,  as  wy  for  nTJ^,  I  Chron.  xiii.  7.  comp. 

II  Sam.  vi.  6.     So  also  Ahph  is  prefixed,  or  commuted  with  He.     See  I 

Chron.  ii.  12,  xiii.    12.  II  Chron.  ii.  15.] [For  a  comparison  of  the 

style  of  the  books  of  Chronicles  with  that  of  the  books  of  Samuel  EUttd 
Kings,  see  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  190  anm.  b),  or  Gebemus  Geschicht 
der  Heb.  Sprach.  S.  38.  ff,     Tr.] 

[6)  This  is  the  opinion  of  most  of  the  Jewish  writers ;  Carpzov,  In- 
trod.   p.  286.,   Episcopius,  Sanctius,   Huet,  and  others,  consider  Ezra 

as  the  compiler  from  previous  documents. The  identity  of  II  Chron. 

xxxvi.  22.  s.  and  Ezra  i.  1,  s.  has  been  accounted  for  on  the  supposition 
of  a  mistake  of  the  transcriber ;  Horive,  Introd.  IV.  55.  note  1).  To  this, 
however,  some  minute  verbal  differences  may  be  objected.— —De 
Wette  (Emleit.  ^  192.  anm.  b),  considers  the  difference  of  the  genea- 
logies I  Chron.  vi.  3.  ss.  and  Ezra  vii.  1.  ss.  as  a  proof  that  Ezra  was  not 
the  compiler  of  Chronicles.  Comp.  also  Bertholdt.  Th.  V.  S.  987. 
ff.  Tr.] 

[c)  So  EiCHHORN,  Th.  II.  S.  583.  f.  and  Dahler  de  libroriim  Par- 
alipomcnon  auctoritate  atque  fide  historica.    Argent.  1819.  p.  5.    TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  263 

§  51.     Sources  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  Kings,  and  Chronicles. 

The  records  from  which  these  books*  were  compiled,  are  referred 
to  throughout ;  but  it  is  questioned  whether  the  Chronicles  have  been 

derived  from  the  same  sources  as  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings. • 

In  the  books  of  Samuel  there  is  indeed  no  citation  of  any  authority ; 
but  that  there  were  in  those  times  pubhc  annals,  is  plain,  from 
I  Chron.  xxvii.  24,  where  they  are  expressly  mentioned,   and  from 

I  Chron.  xxix.  29.  where  their  authors  are  named. [a] In  the  books 

of  Kings  the  history  of  king  Solomon  is  first  mentioned,  and  subse- 
quently the  annals  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  of  the  kings  of  Israel  are 

perpetually  cited.  [6] In  Chronicles,  especially  in  the  second  book, 

there  are  frequent  references  to  records,  from  a  collation  of  which  it 
is  evident  ;  1 )  that  the  history  of  most  of  the  kings  was  written  by  the 
prophets[c]  ;  and  therefore,  agreeably  to  the  prophetic  manner,  there 
is  a  constant  reference  to  the  theocracy  and  to  divine  rewards  and 
punishments  [d].  2)  Many  histories  of  kings  written  by  prophets 
were  inserted  in  the  annals  of  the  kingdom[e].  3)  Citations  of  the 
annals  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel,  in  which  the  historical  wri- 
tings of  the  prophets  just  mentioned  were  inserted,  are  veiy  fre- 
quent[/].  4)  Yet  all  the  historical  writings  of  the  prophets  which  are 
cited,  were  not  inserted  in  those  annals  ;  for  occasionally  the  histori- 
cal writings  of  the  prophets  are  distinguished  from  them,  e.  g.  II  Chron. 

xxxii.  22.  xxxiii.  18.  s. From  all  this  it  follows,  that  the  author 

of  Chronicles  generally  uses  the  same  authorities  as  the  author  of  the 
books  of  Kings,  but  with  the  addition  of  some  others. It  is  be- 
yond all  doubt  that  the  annals  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel  cited 
in  Chronicles  are  not  our  books  of  Kings  ;  for  the  author  refers  the 
reader  who  may  be  desirous  of  further  information  to  those  annals,  in 
cases  where  our  books  of  Kings  have  not  more,  but  less,  than  his  work : 
e.  g.  II  Chron.  xvii.  1 — xx.  34.  comp.  I  Ki.  xv.  24.  xxii.  1 — 33,  41 — 
51  ;  so  also  II  Chron.  xxiii.  1 — xxiv.  27.  comp.  I  Ki.  xi.  1 — xiii.  22. 
Those  annals,  therefore,  which  the  author  of  Chronicles  refers  to, 
are  books  contemporaneous  with  the  events  which  they  relate,  the 

*  [The  author  undoubtedly  means  the  books  of  Kin^s  and  Chronicles,  as  is  plain 
from  the  very  next  sentence  where  he  denies  that  those  of  Samuel  contain  any  such 
references.    Tr.] 


264        PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACfl   BOOk 

greater  part  written  by  prophets.  But  as  his  extracts  often  agree 
with  those  taken  fi'om  the  annals  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel 
which  we  find  in  our  books  of  Kings,  there  is  hardly  room  for  doubt, 
that  the  same  annals  are  the  sources  both  of  the  books  of  Kings  and 
of  those  of  Chronicles,  [g-] 

[a)  I  Chron.  xxvii.  24.  '  Neither  was  the  number  put  in  the  account  of 
the  chronicles  of  king  David.'  I  Chron.  xxix.  29.  '  Now  the  acts  of 
David  the  king,  first  and  last,  behold  they  are  written  in  the  book  of 
Samuel  the  seer,  and  in  the  book  of  Nathan  the  prophet,  and  in  the  book 
of  Gad  the  seer.'  Thus  also  in  II  Chron.  ix.  29.  '  Now  the  rest  of  the 
acts  of  Solomon,  first  and  last,  are  they  not  written  in  the  book  of  Na- 
than the  prophet,  and  in  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah  the  Shilonite,  and  in  the 
visions  of  Iddo  the  seer  against  Jeroboam  the  son  of  Nebat  ?'  From  these 
texts  it  is  plain  that  Samuel,  and  the  prophets  who  succeeded  him,  wrote 
the  history  of  their  times.  Since  in  the  books  of  Samuel  no  monument 
of  the  history  of  David  is  mentioned,  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose  that  the 
contents  of  those  books  were  drawn  from  the  same  history  which  is  refer- 
red to  in  I  Chron.  xxix.  29  ;  especially  since  the  account  in  the  Chronicles 
taken  from  that  history  often  agrees  verbally  with  the  book  of  Samuel, 
(comp.  I  Sam.  xxxi.  1 — 13-  with  I  Chron.  x.  1 — 13;  II  Sam.  v.  17—25. 
with  I  Chron.  xiv.  8 — 17 :  II  Sam.  vii.  with  I  Chron.  xvii.;  II  Sam. 
viii.  with  I  Chron.  xvii.  II  Sam.  x.  with  I  Chron.  xix;)  and  in  other 
places  what  occurs  in  Samuel  is  carefully  omitted  in  Chronicles,  so  that 
the  latter  work  is  not  intelligible  without  the  former.  From  this  it  is 
clear,  that  the  author  of  Chronicles  presupposes  the  books  of  Samuel  to 
be  known.] 

[6)  See  I  Ki.  xi.  41.  xiv.  19,  29.  xv.  7.  and  other  places.  After  the 
histories  of  the  last  kings  of  both  nations,  Hoshea  in  Israel  and  Zedekiah 
in  Judah,  these  references  do  not  occur;  probably  because  in  the  over- 
throw of  those  kingdoms,  the  annals  relating  to  the  government  of  the 
last  king  were  either  not  completed,  or  lost.  The  document  which  in 
I  Ki.  xi.  41.  is  called  "the  acts  of  Solomon"  can  hardly  be  diflferent 
from  "  the  book  of  Nathan,  the  prophecy  of  Ahijah,  and  the  vision  of 
Iddo  "  which  are  mentioned  in  II  Chron.  ix.  29,  as  the  source  of  the  ex- 
tracts given  in  the  work,  since  here  also  a  verbal  agreement  prevails 
similar  to  that  between  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Chronicles.  That 
these  documents  were  public  records  is  shown  from  the  very  nature  of 
the  extracts,  which  partake  of  the  character  of  such  papers.  See  I  Chron. 
xii.  23—40;  xv.  11—24  ;  xxii.  1— xxix.  25.] 

[c)  It  has  already  been  seen  (note  a)  that  the  history  of  David  was 
written  by  the  prophets  Samuel,  Nathan,  and  Gad  (I  Chron.  xxix.  29). 


OP   TfiE   OLD    TESTAMENT.  265 

and  that  of  Solomon  by  the  prophet  Nathan  (II  Chron.  ix.  29.). At 

the  end  of  the  history  of  Rehoboam  in  II  Chron.  xii.  15.,  we  read: that  his 
whole  history  (his  "  acts,  first  and  last,")  is  written  "  in  the  book  of  She- 
maiah  the  prophet,  and  of  Iddo  the  seer  concerning  genealogies,^'  i.  e.  to 
continue  the  genealogies  or  the  histories,  K/irnnS  ;   and  in  II  Chron. 

siii.  22.  "  the  rest  of  the  history  of  Abijah  is  written  ty*nD3  in  the 

reg-is/er*  of  the  prophet  Iddo.''] 

[d)  This  is  confirmed  by  the  freedom  which  is  used  in  reproving  sin, 
and  proved  by  express  declarations.  See  II  Chron.  xx.  34,  and  other 
places.]  [This  fact  is  largely  made  use  of  by  Semler,  Bauer,  De  Wette 
and  their  followers,  in  their  endeavours  to  throw  discredit  upon  these 
books.  Every  thing  disagreeable  to  them  is  explained  away  by  referring 
it  to  what  they  call  the  '  theocratico-mythological  spirit '  (theokratisch- 
mythologische  geist)  of  the  work  and  its  prophetic  authors.  TV.] 

[e)  The  history  of  Jehoshaphat,  composed  by  the  prophet  Jehu,  the  son 
of  Hanani,  was  introduced  (n*?!)?!)  iflto  the  book  of  the  history  of  the 

kings;  II  Chron.  xx.  34. The  history  of  Hezekiah  was  written  by 

Isaiah  in  the  book  of  the  history  of  the  kings  of  Judah  and  Israel;  II 
Chron.  xxxii.  32. The  history  of  Rehoboam  was  written  by  the  pro- 
phets Shemaiah  and  Iddo  for  the  purpose  of  continuing  the  histories,  and 
also  introduced  into  the  well-known  book  of  the  kings  ;  II  Chron.  xii.  15. 

The  history  of  Ahijah  was  written  in  the  Midrash  (register)  of  the 

prophet  Iddo,  and  that  of  Joash  in  the  Midrash  of  the  book  of  ^Kings, 
II  Chron.  xiii.  22.  xxiv.  27.] 

[Le  Clerc  denies  the  agency  of  prophets  in  the  writing  of  the  public 
annals,  and  ascribes  it  to  certain  D"'T':)TD  (6i  s-sJi  Twv  ij'crofivigp.aTWV, 

!j'53'ofJi«v>)fji,a<roypa(poi  ;  Eng.  Trans.  '  recorders ')  who  are  occasionally 
mentioned  in  the  history  of  the  kings :  I  Sam.  viii.  16. 1  Chron.  xviii.  15. 
I  Ki.  iv.  13.  II  Ki.  xviii.  18.  II  Chron.  xxxiv.  8.  But  these  few  instances 
are  not  sufficient  to  establish  his  own  hypothesis,  much  less  to  destroy  the 
force  of  the  positive  evidence  that  the  histories  of  several  of  the  kings 
were  entered  in  the  public  annals  by  prophets.  Tr.'\ 

[/)  Comp.  II  Chron.  xvi.  11.  xx.  34.  xXiv.  27.  xxv.  26.  xxvi.  22. 
xxvii.  7.  xxviii.  26.  xxxii.  32.  xxxiii.  18.  xxxv.  26.  xxxvi.  8.,  and  the  pas- 
sages of  I  and  II  Kings  cited  in  note  c)  on  J  45.     TV.] 

\^  Jahn,  in  the  passage  of  his  German  Introduction  from  which  this  is  taken, 
uses  the  word  Verzeichniss.  The  Eng.  Trans,  has  "story."  Gesenius 
explains  the  Hebrew  by  *  exposition,'   '  interpretatioo.'    Tr.] 

34 


266    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

Ig)  This  is  confirmed  by  the  occurrence  of  expressions  in  both  books 
which,  being  incongruous  with  the  age  of  the  compilers,  must  have  been 
copied  from  the  ancient  records,  and  from  their  exact  similarity,  appear 
to  have  been  taken  from  the  same  original :  comp.  II  Chron.  v.  9.  with 
I  Ki.  viii.  8.  and  II  Chron.  viii.  8.  with  I.  Ki.  ix.  21.  TV.] 

§  52.     Historical  Credit  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  Kings,  and 
Chronicles. 

As  the  greatest  part  of  the  history  which  these  books  contain  is 
derived  from  the  same  documents  contemporary  with  the  events,  and 
some  of  it  from  others  also  contemporaneous,  and  as  the  authors  show 
their  fideUty  by  referring  their  readers  to  the  sources  whence  they 
have  drawn  their  information  ;  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  truth 

of  their  narratives. 1)  The  readers  of  our  authors,  of  the  same 

age  with  them,  who  had  access  to  those  ancient  records,  and  were 
able  to  ascertain  their  fidelity,  thought  these  extracts  worthy  of 
such  credit,  that  they  abandoned  the  ancient  contemporary  re- 
cords to  the  ravages  of  time. 2)  The  authors  adhered  closely 

to  the  documents  whence  they  made  their  compilations  ;  for  the  cha- 
racter of  their  style  and  language  varies  according  to  the  variations 
in  those  ancient  documents  caused  by  the  difference  of  authors. 
Hence  it  is  evident  that  the  words  of  the  documents  have  been  re- 
tained, as  is  elsewhere  usual  with  oriental  historians. This  close 

adherence  appears  also  from  the  number  of  Chaldee  and  modern 
words  being  less  than  might  otherwise  be  expected  from  the  age  in 

which  the  compilers  lived. 3)  Many  expressions  do  not  suit  their 

age,  and  evidently  have  been  scrupulously  retained  from  the  contem- 
porary records.    Comp.  I  Ki.  viii.  22.  ix.  21.  [a] 4)  Many  things 

are  related  which  are  disgraceful  to  the  nation  and  to  its  principal 
men,  and  the  speeches  which  are  recorded  agree  more  accurately 
with  the  characters  and  situations  of  the  speakers,  than  could  be  ex- 
pected in  a  fiction  or  a  revised  and  altered  composition.  Comp. 
I  Sam.  ix.  5—8,  11—14,  18—27.  xii.  1—25.  xxv.  25—31.  II  Sam. 
vii.  18.  s.  I  Chron.  xvii.  16—27.  II  Sam.  xiv.  4—20.  xvii.  7—13. 
xix.  35—38.  I  Ki.  iii.  5—15.  viii.  14—63.  II  Chron.  vi.  1—42. 
n  Ki,  xix.  5 — 19. 5)  The  whole  course  of  the  history  is  con- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  267 

iirmed  by  tlie  testimony  of  other  contemporary  writers,  namely,  of 
the  Psalmists  and  the  Prophets,  whose  accounts  of  their  respective 
periods  are  altogether  coincident  with  what  we  read  in  these  books. 
Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  11.  Sect.  I,  §  62.  S.  256.  f.  [b] 

Bertholdt,  in  his  Introduction,  P.  III.  §  276,  contends  that  the  aulhoi 
of  Chronicles  drew  part  of  his  information  from  modern  accounts,  which 
had  already  incorporated  with  the  true  history  corrupt  traditions,  or  my- 
thi.  But  the  author,  who  is  fond  of  citing  his  authorities,  never  refers 
to  any  modern  document,  so  that  the  argument  of  Bertholdt  rests  on  mere 
suspicion.  In  I  Chron.  i.  13,  the  author  has  not  even  ventured  to  add  the 
name  of  Tyre ;  whence  it  appears,  that  he  used  his  documents  with  scru- 
pulous integrity. 

[a)  I  Ki.  viii.  8.  must  have  been  written  before  the  spoliation  of  the 
temple;  I  Ki.  ix.  21.  before  the  dedine,  and  II  Ki.  viii.  22.  before  the 
complete  overthrow,  of  the  monarchy  of  Judah ;  I  Ki.  xii.  19.  and  II  Ki. 
X.  27,  before  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel ;  and  II  Ki.  xviii.  5. 
before  the  time  of  Josiah,  whose  character  was  at  least  equal  to  that  of 

Hezekiah,  and  who  is  declared  to  be  superior  to  him,  II  Ki.  xxiii.25. 

The  repetition  in  II  Ki.  xviii.  9.,  comp.  xvii.  6.,  seems  to  show  that  the 
compiler  has  inserted  portions  of  distinct  documents  in  this  part  of  his 
history.     Tr.]  m 

[b)  David's  history  is  supported  by  the  contents  of  the  Psalms,  and 
that  of  the  later  kings,  in  a  great  degree,  by  the  writings  of  the  contem- 
poraneous prophets  ;  so  that  in  the  one  case  the  Psalms  and  the  books  of 
Samuel,  and  in  the  other  the  Prophets  and  the  books  of  Kings,  mutually 
confirm  each  other.  The  great  promise  made  to  David  in  II  Sam.  vii. 
I  Chron.  xvii.,  is  repeated  in  Ps.  Ixxxix.  with  more  particularity,  and 
corroborated  by  all  the  subsequent  prophets,  whenever  they  speak  of  a 
great  descendant  of  David,  or  of  a  second  David.  See  Isa.  xi.  Amos 
ix.  11.  Hos.  iii.  5.  Mic.  v.  1 — 3.  Jer,  xxiii.  5.  xxx.  5.  xxxiii.  17,  21,  26. 

Ezek.  xxxiv.  23 — 31. ^Some  circumstances  are  also  expressly  men~ 

tinned  by  the  prophets.  See  Hos.  viii.  5,  6.  x.  5,  6.  xiii.  11.  Amos 
iv.  4.  viii.  14.] 

§  63.    Difficulties  in  the  Boohs  of  Samuel,  Kings,  and  Chronicles. 

I.  The  narrative  of  the  three  years'  famine  on  account  of  Saul's 
bloody  family,  who  slew  the  Gibeonites,  is  found  in  an  appendix,  II 
Sam.  xxi.,  in  a  style  different  from  that  of  the  book  itself,  and  might 
therefore  become  the  subject  of  some  critical  discussion.  But,  pre- 
turning  that  the  view  of  the  transaction  which  is  given  is  correct,  H 


268  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOK 

ought  to  be  considered  that  the  law  concerning  the  punishment  oi 

homicides,  Gen.  ix.  5.  s.  and  Ex.  xxi.  12,  14.,  was  of  divine  origin, 

and  admitted  of  no  exception,  and  that  length  of  time  could  furnish 

no  cause  for  remission  of  its  execution  :    this,  at  least,  must  be 

allowed  to  have  been  the  opinion  of  that  age  respecting  this  crime 

and  its  punishment.     And  since  at  that  time  the  divine  providence 

was  considered  as  visibly  interposing  in  every  pubBc  calamity,  and 

therefore  in  that  long  continued  famine  ;  it  was  inquired  by  means  of 

the  sacred  lot,  whether  those  homicides  of  the  family  of  Saul  who 

had  slain  the  Gibeonites,  (comp.  II  Sam.  iv.  4.  ix.)*  and  remained 

unpunished,  were  the  cause  of  this  calamity,  to  which  inquiry  the  lot 

returning  an  answer  in  the  affirmative,  the  criminals  were  delivered 

to  the  avengers  of  murder.     Any  suspicion  that  the  whole  affair  was 

only  an  artifice  of  David  to  procure  the  execution  of  his  own  designs, 

would  be  entirely  groundless,  since  none  of  the  sufferers  could  have 

been  in  any  way  injurious  to  his  interests,  t 

II.   The  numbering  of  the  people,  which  is  related  in  an  appendix, 

II  Sam.  xxiv.,  and  in  I  Chron.  xxvii.  23.  s.,  was  mihtary  ;  for  which 

reason  it  was  conducted,  not  by  the  chief  genealogist,  itaiB^n,  but  by 
.  •  ■■      - 

the  commander  of  the  army,  n2iDn,  with  a  mihtary  guard.     That 

some  unworthy  object  was  concealed  in  this  design  of  David,  appears 
from  the  disapprobation  of  Joab,  a  man  in  other  cases  by  no  means 
scrupulous.  Probably  the  king  was  planning  more  extensive  con- 
quests[a]  of  people  beyond  the  Umits  assigned  by  Moses,  by  which 
means  the  Hebrews  would  be  soon  widely  scattered,  and  exposed,  as 
circumstances  then  were,  to  the  most  imminent  danger  of  becoming 
idolatrous.  Of  the  proposed  punishments  David  chose  the  plague, 
which  no  doubt  would  have  occurred  independently  of  this  particular 
cause,  but  in  that  case  would  not  have  been  considered  as  a  punish- 
ment of  an  iniquitous  project.  As  soon  as  the  plague  was  observed 
at  Jerusalem  at  the  threshing  floor  of  Oman,  David  bought  the  floor 

*  [The  object  of  the  author  in  these  references  is  to  show,  by  proving  the  exemp- 
tion of  Mephibosheth  and  his  family  from  the  proscription,  that  only  the  murderers 
were  slain.     Tr.] 

t  [The  direct  line  of  descent  from  Saul  being  still  preserved  in  the  person  of  Me- 
phibosheth, while'the  sufferers  were  only  sons  by  a  concubine,  and  descendants  m 
the  female  line.     TV.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  269 

and  field,  consecrated  it  by  offering  a  sacrifice,  and  designated  it  foi' 
the  fixture  site  of  the  temple.  This  passage,  therefore,  contains  an 
indication  of  the  cause  why  the  temple  was  built  in  that  place. 

III.  In  the  history  of  Elijah  and  Ehsha  certain  miracles  occur  in 
wliich  we  cannot  discern  that  important  object,  worthy  of  the  Deity, 
which  is  conspicuous  in  many  other  miracles  ;  I  Ki.  xviii.  II  Ki.  v. 
Some  persons  suppose  them  to  have  been  natural  events-  which  had 
been  handed  down  through  a  long  course  of  oral  tradition,  and  exag- 
gerated by  tlie  addition  of  wonderful  circumstances.  But  the  author 
elsewhere  derives  his  information  from  contemporaneous  written  do- 
cuments ;  and  the  famine  and  subsequent  rain  granted  to  the  prayers 
of  Elijah,  I  Ki.  xvii.  1.  xviii.  1.,  are  mentioned  also  by  Menander, 
as  cited  by  Josephus,  Ant.  Jud.  VIII.  xiii.  2.,  although  he  limits  the 
drought  to  a  single  year,  and  attributes  the  rain  to  the  prayers  of 
Ithobal,  king  of  Tyre.  Some  of  the  extraordinary  accounts  which 
are  related  can  be  explained  on  natural  principles  without  any  forced 
construction  of  the  language,  as,  for  instance,  those  which  are  re- 
counted in  I  Ki.  xvii.  4.  ss.,  17 — 24.  II  Ki.  ii.  1.  ss.  iv.  8 — 37.  vi.  1 — 7, 
18 — 20.  xiii.  21.  ;[b]  and  the  design  of  others,  which  are  undoubt- 
edly miracles,  is  too  plain  to  be  misunderstood  ;  and  is  worthy  of  the 
Divine  Being.  If  all  are  miracles,  perhaps  the  imperfection  of  the 
narrative  prevents  us  from  discovering  an  adequate  object,  [c] 

IV.  With  respect  to  the  discrepancies  between  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles and  Kings,  it  is  suflScient  to  observe,  that  some  of  them  are  of 
little  moment ;  some  are  caused  by  various  readings  ;  some  have 
arisen  fi-om  omissions  in  Chronicles  of  what  is  related  in  Samuel  and 
Kings,  or  the  introduction  of  what  is  passed  over  in  those  books  ;  and 
others,  perhaps,  arise  from  interpolations.  Comp.  I  Ki.  xv.  16.  with 
II  Chron.  xv.  19  ;  I  Ki.  xxii.  44.  with  II  Chron.  xvii.  6  ;  II  Ki.  ix. 
27.  s.  with  II  Chron.  xxii.  9  ;  especially  II  Chron.  xxxvi.  6.  with 
II  Ki.  xxiv.  1,  6.  and  Jer.  xxii.  19.  xxxvi.  30  ;  see  also  Germ.  In- 
trod.  P.  II.  Sect.  I.  §.  53.  p.  263.  s.[d] 

[a)  Michaelis  and  Dathe  agree  ia  the  same  opinion,  and  add  that  Da- 
vid's intention  seems  to  have  been  to  enrol  the  body  of  the  people  as  sol- 
diers. See  Dathe  in  loc.  Others  have  supposed  that  David's  sin  in  this 
matter  was  pride  and  presumption,  inclining  to  trust  to  the  numbers  and 


270    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

power  of  his  people  for  support,  and  forgetting  his  entire  dependence 
upon  the  divine  governor.  This  crime  may  also  have  been  participa- 
ted in  to  a  considerable  degree  by  the  people  themselves.  See  Hales? 
Analysis  of  Chronology,  II.  386.     TV.] 

[6)  If  the  author  means  that  all  these  cases  are  susceptible  of  such 
an  interpretation,  it  is  an  admission  by  no  means  to  be  conceded :  and 
with  respect  to  any,  except  the  first,  is  very  doubtful.     TV.] 

[c)  In  the  miracles  which  are  related  in  I  Ki.  xviii.  and  II  Ki.  v.,  the 
design  is  too  obvious  to  escape  any  reader.  The  fragmentary  character 
of  other  parts  of  the  work  will  account  for  the  brevity  and  imperfection 
of  the  narratives.] 

[d)  Such  discrepancies  prove  that  the  author  of  Chronicles  has  not 
drawn  from  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings,  and  that  those  books  have 
not  been  altered  so  as  to  correspond  with  the  former.] 

§  64.     Character  of  the  Text  of  the  Books  of  Samuel,  Kings^ 
and  Chronicles. 

The  text  of  these  books  contains  more  errors  than  that  of  the 
more  ancient  books.  Some  interpolations  in  the  books  of  Samuel 
have  been  already  mentioned,  P.  I.  §  136;  to  which  perhaps  the 
passages  found  in  II  Sara.  xxi.  1 — 4.  II  Ki.  iv.  1 — 44.,  where  a 
change  of  style  is  observable,  and  I  Sam.  xiii.  19 — 21.,  should  be 

added. Readings  are  constantly  occurring  to  which  no  sense  can 

be  attributed,  or  which  convey  a  sense  either  incredible  or  repugnant 
to  other  passages,  as  in  I  Sam.  xiii.  1.  h'Hi.W  r\W  p,  Saul  was  the  son 

of  a  year,  where  the  number  of  years  is  lost.  So  in  I  Sam.  xiii.  5. 
thirty  thousand  chariots  of  war,  belonging  to  the  Philistines,  are  men- 
tioned ;  II  Chron.  xiii  3,  17.  armies  of  400,000  and  800,000  men  ; 
II  Chron.  xiv.  7.  s.  armies  of  680,000  and  1,000,000  ;  II  Chron. 
xvii.  14—19.  an  army  of  1,600,000  ;  I  Ki.  v.  6.  (iv.  26.)  Solomon 
is  said  to  have  40,000  nnx,  stables  or  stalls  for  horses,  while  in  II 

Chron.  ix.  26.  only  4000  are  mentioned  ;  and  II  Chron.  xxii.  2. 
Ahaziah  is  said  to  have  been  42  years  old  when,  on  the  death  of  his 
father,  who  died  at  40  years  of  age,  he  began  to  reign,  whereas  in 
II  Ki.  viii.  26.  Ahaziah  is  correctly  said  to  have  been  22  years  old. 
when  he  commenced  his  reign,  [a] 


OP   THE    OLD   TESTAMENT.  271 

[a)  Remarkable  errors  occur  also  in  other  places.  Thus  in  I  Sam. 
vi.  18,  h2i<  occurs  for  pN  ;     I  Sam.  xii.  11.  p3  for  pn3  ;    II  Sam. 

••     T  V   T  -    :  T   T 

xvii.  25.  '"^Nni^r'n  for  ''7''J??Dl?»n,  as  in  the  Alexandrine  version  and  in 
I  Chron.  ii.  17.] 

§  55.  Collation  of  the  Books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  with  the  Books  of 

Chronicles. 

As  the  books  of  Samuel  and  Kings  contain  the  same  history  as  the 
books  of  Chronicles,  the  two  works  should  be  continually  compared, 
not  merely  in  order  to  become  the  more  thoroughly  acquainted  with 
the  history,  but  also  for  the  purpose  of  applying  the  one  to  illustrate 
or  correct  what  may  be  obscure  or  erroneous  in  the  other.  Thus 
the  objectionable  parts  in  II  Samuel,  that  relate  to  David's  excessive 
respect  for  Joab,  which  prevented  him  from  punishing  this  man, 
although  guilty  of  a  treacherous  murder,  are  illustrated  by  1  Chron. 
xi.  6. The  word  D^jrij,  applied  in  II  Sam.  viii.  18.  to  the  sons 

of  David,   is  commuted  for  D'3^><'^  in  I  Chron.  xviii.  17. The 

reading  m^ran  Sk  1T1,  in  II  Sam.  v.    17.  ought  to  be  corrected 

from  that  of  I  Chron.  xiv.  8,,  orT'JsS  «X"'i.[a]     Comp.  also  I  Chron. 

xxi.  16.  with  II  Sam.  xxiv.  17  ;  I  Chron.  xxi.  1.  with  II  Sam.  xxiv. 
1  ;  II  Sam.  vi.  2.  with  I  Chron.  xiii.  6  ;  II  Sam.  xxi.  19.  with  I 
Chron.  xx.  5  ;  I  Chron.  xi  20.  with  II  Sam.  xxiii.  18 ;  II 
Sam.  xxiii.  20.  with  I  Chron.  xi.  22.  See  also  Eichhokns  Repert. 
fiir  Bibl.  und  Morgenl.  Lit.  II.  St.  S.  267.  ff.  and  Schmidt  Historia 
Canonis  p.  202.  ss.[&] 

[a)  There  is  no  reason  to  suspect  the  incorrectness  of  either  reading,  as 
the  one  may  express  in  general  what  the  other  states  with  more  particu- 
larity. TV.j 

\b)  The  following  table  of  the  more  remarkable  parallel  places  of  the 
books  of  Chronicles  and  those  of  Samuel  and  Kings  is  from  De  Wette, 
Einleit.  \  190  anm,  a)  S.  263. 

1  Chron.  x.   1 — 12.        with        I  Sam.  xxxi. 

"  xi.  1—9.  II  Sam.  v.  1—10. 

"         xi.  10 — 41.  I  Sam.  xxiii.  8—39. 

«         xiii.  1—14.  IlSam.  yi.  3— 11. 


272         PARTICULAR   INTRODUCTION  TO   EACH  BOOK 


I  Chron.  xiv.  1 — 7.  Tfith 

"  xvii. 

"  xviii. 

*'  six. 

"  XX.  1—3. 

XX.  4 — 8. 

xxi. 

II  Chron.  i.  3—13. 
"  i.  14—17. 

"  iii.  iv. 

*'  V.  2— vii.  10. 

"  vii.  11—22. 

^  viii. 

"  ix.  1—12. 

"  ix.  13—31. 

"  X.  1— xi.  4. 

"  xii.  2—11. 

"  XTi.  1—6. 

"  xviii. 

«  XX.  31—37. 

«  xxi.  6—10. 

"  xxii.  2—6. 

"  xxii.  10— xxiii.  21 

"  xxiv.  1 — 14. 

»  XXV.  1—4,  11, 17—24,  27,  28, 

*♦  xxvi.  1,  2. 

♦'  xxvi.  3,  4,  21. 

w  xxvii.  1—3. 

"  xxviii.  1 — 4. 

"  xxix.  1, 2. 

"  xxxii.  9 — 21. 

"  xxxii.  24—31. 

"  xxxiii.  1—10. 

"  xxxiv.  1,  2,  8—28. 

"  xxxiv.  29—33. 

i'  XXXV.  18,  20—25.  xxxvi.  1. 

"  xxxvi.  2—4. 


II  Sam.  V.  11—25. 

"  vii. 

"  viii. 

"  x. 

♦'  xi.  1.  xii.  30.  s. 

"  xxi.  18—22. 

"  xxiv. 

I  Ki.  iii.  4—14. 

"  X.  26—29, 

«  V.  15—32. 

"  vi.  vii. 

"  viii. 

"  ix.  1—9. 

"  xi.  15—28. 

"  X.  1—13. 

"  X.  14—29. 

"  xii.  1—24. 

"  xiv.  251—28. 

"  XV.  17—22. 

"  xxii.  2—35. 

"  xxii.  41—50. 

II  Ki.  viii.  17—24. 

»  viii.  26—29. 

»  xi. 

"  xii.  1—16. 

•'  xiv.  1—14,  19,  20. 

"  xiv.  21,  22. 

"  XV.  2—5. 

«  XV.  33,  35. 

«  xvi.  2 — 4. 

"  xviii.  2,  3. 

"  xviii.  17—37. 

"  XX.  1—19. 

"  xxi.  1—10. 

"  xxii. 

"  xxiii.  1—20. 

"  xxiii.  22,  23, 29,  30. 

*'  xxiii.  31—34.     TV-.l 


OP   THE   OLD    TESTAMENT.  273 


CHAPTER  V. 


OP  THE   BOOKS   OF   EZRA   AND   NEHEMIAH- 


§  56.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ezra. 

The  book  of  Ezra  consists  of  two  parts.  The  first,  c.  i — vi.  con* 
tains  the  history  of  the  return  of  the  Hebrews  to  their  native  land,  of 
the  re-estabUshment  of  divine  worship,  and  of  the  rebuilding  of  the 
temple  of  Jerusalem  ;  including  a  period  of  twenty  years,  from  the 
first  of  Cyrus  to  the  sixth  of  Darius  Hystaspes,  i.  e.   from  the  year 

536  to  the  year  515  B.  C.[a] The  second  part,  c.  vii — x.,  relates 

the  transactions  of  Ezra,  who  in  the  seventh  year  of  Artachshasta,* 
xnDB^niTiN,  (or  Xerxes,  478  B.  C.)  led  another  colony  of  returning 

exiles  to  Judaea,  being  invested  by  the  king  with  ample  authority 
to  arrange  the  afiairs  of  the  Jews  according  to  the  law  of  Moses. 
He  also  conducted  a  considerable  caravan  of  returning  Jews  to  Jeru~ 
salem,  administered  his  office,  and  reformed  abuses.  Between  the 
first  and  second  parts  of  the  book  there  is  an  interval  of  thirty,  seven 
years,  of  which  no  account  is  given. 

Cyrus  by  heralds  and  public  letters  invited  all  the  worshippers  of  Je- 
hovah to  return  to  Judaea  and  rebuild  the  temple  ;  and  Ezra  obtained 
letters  to  the  same  effect.  It  is  therefore  not  to  be  doubted  that  many  of 
the  ten  tribes  gradually  returned,  who,  because  they  came  often,  and  not 
at  one  time  nor  in  considerable  numbers,  are  not  mentioned  in  the  his- 
tory. Hence  in  the  age  of  the  Maccabees,  I  Mac.  v.  9 — 54,  and  in  the 
time  of  Christ,  Gilead  and  Galilee  were  inhabited  by  Hebrews.  The 
prophecies,  therefore,  concerning  the  return  of  the  ten  tribes  have  been 

*  [The  author's  orthography  of  the  name  of  this  Persian  monarch,  has  been  retained 
in  preference  to  the  common  word  Artaxerxes,  with  the  view  chiefly  of  avoiding  oh- 
scurity.    Tr.] 

35 


274  PARTICULAR    INTROBUCTION   TO  EACH   BOOK 

accomplished,  and  it  is  in  vain  that  the  learned  inquire  what  has  become 
of  them.     Comp.  Archaol.  II.  Th.  I,  B.  §  53.  S.  236. 

[a)  Cyrus  issued  his  prociamation  throughout  the  whole  Medo- 
Persian  empire  to  the  worshippers  of  Jehovah  to  return  to  their  own 
country  and  re-establish  his  worship;  for  which  purpose  he  granted 
them  subsidies  and  restored  their  sacred  vessels  which  had  been  taken  by 
Nebuchadnezzar.  A  caravan  of  nearly  50,000  persons,  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Zerubbabel  the  governor  and  Joshua  the  high  priest,  went  in 
consequence  to  Judaea  and  prepared  for  the  building  of  the  temple.  The 
Samaritans,  whom  the  Jews  had  refused  to  admit  to  a  participation  with 
themselves  in  this  undertaking,  made  efforts  to  prevent  its  progress  du- 
ring the  reigns  of  Cyrus  and  Cambyses  ;  and  in  that  of  Smerdis  were 
successful.  Upon  his  death,  however,  the  Hebrews  resumed  the  work 
at  the  instance  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  and  their  efforts  were  sanctioned 
by  Darius  Hystaspes ;  so  that  the  building  was  finished  in  the  twenty- 
first  year  after  the  return,  and  in  the  515th  before  Christ.] 

§  57.     Artachshasta,  Ezrav'ii.  1.,  is  Xerxes. 

1)  The  order  of  history  requires  that  king  Artachshasta  who  con- 
ferred on  Ezra  the  most  ample  powers,  vii.  1.  ss.,  should  be  the  king 
who  held  the  sceptre  of  Persia  next  after  Darius  Hystaspes,  v.  6.  vi. 
16,  namely,   Xerxes,   the   husband  of  Esther.      That   NnOB'^nnx, 

Artachshast  or  Artachshasta,  approaches  nearer  to  the  name 
Artaxkrxes  is  no  objection  ;  for  the  names  of  the  Persian  kings 
were  merely  titles  of  honour,  by  which  the  people  were  accustomed 
to  designate  each  of  their  monarchs,  so  that  their  proper  names  were 
seldom  heard :  a  custom  which  they  retained  even  as  late  as  the 
seventeenth  century.  xnDtt'nmN,  compounded  of  the  Persian  ci»i/ 
ART,  or  Jjj ,  ARD,  strong,  and  the  Zendic  khshetro,  khshered. 
kheshetrae,  a  warrior,  signifies  a  strong,  a  mighty  warrior.  Comp. 

Herodot.  VI.  98. 2)     If  the  Artachshasta  of  Ezra  were  Artax- 

erxes  Longimanus,  as  some  contend,  Ezra  must  have  come  to  Jeru- 
salem in  the  year  467  B.  C,  and  the  state  of  thmgs  could  not  have 
become  in  the  course  of  thirteen  years  so  distressing  as  it  was  when 
Nehemiah  came  to  Jerusalem  in  the  year  444  B.  C,  induced  by  tlie 
report  of  the  miserable  condition  of  Judaea  and  Jerusalem  which  he 
had  heard  the  year  preceding. 3)  The  good  will  of  Artach- 
shasta to  Ezra  and  the  Jews  coincides  with  the  favours  which  were 
fihown  by  Xerxes  to  Esther  and  Mordecai ;  and  this  monarch  could 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  275 

hardly  have  been  unnoticed  in  a  history  of  the  Jews,  as  must  be  the 
case  on  the  supposition  that  Artachshasta  was  the  same  as  Longima- 

nus. 4)     Artachshasta  invested  Ezra  with  these  ample  powers  in 

the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,  the  same  in  which  Xerxes  returned  to 
Persia  after  his  unsuccessful  expedition  into  Greece  ;  and  probably, 
in  imitation  of  Cyrus  and  Darius,  he  wished  to  render  the  God  of 

heaven  propitious  to  him  by  conferring  benefits  upon  the  Jews. 

Thus  every  consideration  is  in  favour  of  the  hypothesis  that  the 
Artachshasta  of  the  book  of  Ezra  is  the  same  as  Xerxes. [a] 

[a)  The  chronological  statements  given  in  this  section,  and  in  §  63  and 
g  66,  are  at  direct  variance  with  those  made  by  Prideatjx,  Connexions 
P.  I.  B.  V.  anno  458,  and  B.  VI.  an7io  445,  433,  and  428.  The  latter 
supposes  Ezra  to  have  left  Babylon  in  the  7th  year  of  Artaserxes  Longi- 
manus,  B.  C.  458.  Nehemiah,  according  to  his  opinion,  left  Susa  in  the 
20th  year  of  Artaxerxes  Longimauus,  (B.  C.  445)  and  returned  after  a 
short  time ;  but  having  obtained  the  royal  permission,  and  fuller  powers, 
went  back  to  Jerusalem  immediately.  After  remaining  there  twelve 
years,  he  revisited  Susa  in  the  33d  year  of  Artaxerxes,  (B.  C.  433),  and 
staid  there ^ye  years.  He  finally  returned  to  Jerusalem  in  the  37th  year 
of  Artaxerxes,  (B.  C.  428),  thirty  years  after  Ezra's  departure  from  Ba- 
bylon.  To  examine  the  arguments  advanced  by  Jahn  and  Prideaux 

respectively,  would  occupy  a  space  inconsistent  with  the  limits  of  this 
work.  The  arguments  on  both  sides  are  plausible,  and  both  systems 
give  rise  to  difficulties  ;  but  upon  the  whole,  those  which  encumber  that 
espoused  by  Jahn  appear  to  be  the  most  numerous  and  most  important. 
Usher  (Annals,  p.  140.)  Buddaeus  (Hist.  Vet.  Test.  II.  728.  ss.) 
Httet  (Dem.  Evang.  Prop.  IV.  {  4.)  Vitringa  (Observ.  Sacr.  Lib.  VI. 
p.  364.  ss.)  Carpzov  (Introd.  p.  319,  331.)  and  Hales  (Anal,  of 
Chron.  II.  528.  s.)  agree  with  Prideaux  as  to  the  date  of  Ezra's  depar- 
ture from  Babylon.     TV.] 

§  58.     Ezra  is  the  author. 

That  the  second  part,  c.  vii — x.,  was  written  by  Ezra,  does  not  ad- 
mit of  a  doubt ;  for  the  author  uses  the  first  person,  viii.  15 — 26.  ix. 

1 5  ;  and  calls  himself  Ezra,  s.  1. It  \i  quite  improbable  that 

the  passage  c.  vii.  1 — 26,  was  written  by  any  other  person  than  Ezra ; 
for  the  royal  document,  v.  1 1 — 26,  was  certainly  inserted  by  him,  and 
it  follows  necessarily  thatu.  1 — 10  which  precede  and  are  inseparably 
connected  with  it,  must  have  originated  with  the  same  author.    BTo 


276    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

advantage  is  gained  by  suggesting  the  doubt  whether  Ezra  would  have 
applied  to  himself  the  lofty  title  HB'D  min3  ITID  "I31D,  a  perfect  teach- 
er of  the  law  of  Moses,  c.  vii,  6  :  for  if,  as  is  very  probable,  that  ho- 
norary appellation  expressed  no  more  than  '  Doctor  of  Divinity,'  or 
'  Teacher  of  the  Holy  Scripture'  does  at  the  present  day,  Ezra  might 
apply  it  to  himself  without  any  indelicacy  ;  not  to  say  that  the  rules  of 
delicacy  differ  in  different  ages  and  countries. 

That  the  first  part  also,  c.  i — vi,  was  written  by  Ezra,  appears,  1) 
from  the  connexion  of  the  sixth  and  seventh  chapters  :  the  supposi- 
tion that  Ezra  has  taken  the  history  in  c.  i — vi.  almost  verbally  from 
more  ancient  annals  accounting  very  satisfactorily  for  the  difference 
of  style.  2)  From  the  manner  of  narration  being  the  same  in  both 
parts  ;  for  as  in  the  second  part,  c.  vii.  10 — 26,  the  royal  letter  is  in- 
serted entire  in  the  Chaldee  dialect,  so  in  the  first  part,  the  edict  of 
Cyrus,  the  letter  of  the  Samaritans  to  the  Pseudo-Smerdes,  and  the 
answer  of  the  latter,  are  quoted  word  for  word  ;  and  part,  c.  iv.  8 — 
vi.  18,  is  written  in  Chaldee.  The  same  fact  is  confirmed,  3)  by  the 
brevity  of  the  history,  which  is  such  that  it  can  hardly  be  attributed  to 
several  authors,  unless  there  be  historical  evidence  to  that  effect. 

It  may  be  of  use  to  recollect  that  the  language  of  Ezra  is  mixed  with 
many  Chaldaisms,  and  differs  very  considerably  from  that  of  Moses,  and 
that  its  orthography  contains  a  much  larger  number  of  the  metres  Itctio- 
nis.  We  meet  also  with  many  words  and  ideas  which  were  unknown  to 
the  more  ancient  writers,  such  as  the  names  of  vases  SoiJN  and  D'SiVnO 

0.  i.  9 ;  \VW')  a  licence  or  grant,  c.  iii.  7 ;  DJ^HD,  translated,  ni  J3,  com- 
panions, 0.  iv.  7 ;  parnSj  a  copy,  c.  iv.  11.  vii.  11 ;  DTHJ,  servants  of  the 
temple,  c.  ii.  43,  58,  70.  viii.  l7,  20,  whereas  the  Ciin}  of  Moses  are 
Levites:  &c. 

§  59.     Difficulties  in  the  Book  of  Ezra. 

I.  The  refusal  of  the  Jews  to  permit  the  Samaritans  to  unite  with 
them  for  religious  purposes,  c.  iv.  is  not  to  be  imputed  as  a  crime  to 
the  writer,  who  merely  relates  the  fact.  Besides  the  Jews  them* 
selves  cannot  very  well  be  censured  in  this  affair  ;[«]  for  they  saw 


UP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  277 

plainly  that  the  anxiety  of  the  Samaritans  did  not  arise  so  much  from 
a  desire  to  unite  in  the  erection  of  the  temple,  as  from  a  wish  to  par- 
ticipate in  the  advantages  which  the  peculiar  good  will  of  Cyrus 
would  afford  the  Jews  :  just  as  in  the  time  of  Alexander  they  would 
gladly  have  been  considered  as  Jews  for  the  same  reason,  while  un- 
der Antiochus  Epiphanes  they  denied  all  connexion  with  that  people, 
and  consecrated  their  temple  on  mount  Gerizim  to  Jupiter. 

II.  When  Ezra,  c.  ix.  x.,  put  away  from  the  people  those  of  their 
wives  who  were  foreigners,  and  their  children  by  them,  his  conduct 
could  hardly  have  originated  in  a  misunderstanding  of  the  plain  law 
of  Moses,  Exod.  xxxiv.  15.  s.  Deut.  vii.  3,  upon  that  subject,  but 
must  have  proceeded  from  a  conviction  that  the  same  cause  for  which 
Moses  had  interdicted  marriages  with  the  Canaanites,  namely,  the 
danger  of  seduction  to  idolatry,  was  equally  strong  in  his  own  time 
for  interdicting  marriages  with  other  foreigners :  and  that  this  was  the 
true  motive  of  his  proceeding  is  expressly  remarked  in  Neh.  xiii.  26. 
Comp.  JosEPHUs  Ant.  Jud.  XVIII.  ix.  5. 

[a)  The  Samaritans  were  saved  from  any  part  of  the  expense,  and 
they  had  the  common  privilege  granted  to  all  foreigners,  of  offering  in 
the  temple  if  they  wished  to  worship  Jehovah.] 

§  60.     Character  of  the  text  of  Ezra. 

The  remaining  difficulties  arise  from  errors  in  the  texts,  the  exist- 
ence of  which,  even  to  some  extent,  in  so  many  lists  of  proper 
names,  and  in  so  many  numerical  statements,  is  by  no  means  a  mat- 
ter of  surprise.  Thus  the  number  of  names  in  c.  ii.  1 — 63,  does  not 
agree  with  the  sum  total  in  v.  64,  nor  do  the  parallel  places  in  Neh. 
vii.  6 — 69,  and  III  Esdr.  v.  8.  ss.,*  where  more  names  are  found, 
afford  any  assistance,  since  the  number  is  different  in  each,  [a]  So 
also  Ezr.  i.  9.  s.  the  number  of  the  vessels  is  made  to  amount  to 
5400,  while  the  sum  total  of  these  mentioned  does  not  exceed  2499. 
Comp.  also  Ezr.  viii.  3.  v.  10.  The  third  book  of  Ezra*  which  is 
not  properly  apocryphal,  but  a  translation  of  the  canonical  book  of 
Ezra,  with  occasional  interpolations,  [6]  has  at  the  end  a  long  addition, 
which  is  also  found  in  Neh.  vii.  13 — x.  40,  and  seems  formerly  to 

*  fThe  apocryphal  book  called  in  our  Bibles,  the  First  of  Esdras.    ^r.J 


Esd 

.  i.  1 — 23.    comp. 

ii.  1—15. 

ii.  16—31.       " 

iii.  1— V.  6. 

V  8 — 13.     comp. 

vi.  1— ix.  36.  " 

ix.  37—55.      " 

278    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

have  been  written  at  the  end  of  the  book  of  Ezra  itself,  since  Jose- 
PHUs,  Ant.  Jud.  XL  v.  5,  has  subjoined  it  to  Ezra's  history.  Per- 
haps it  was  afterwards  left  out  of  Ezra  because  it  was  found  also 
in  Nehemiah. 

[a)  Thus  in  Ezra  the  sum  total  amounts  to  only  29,818  ;  in  Nehemiah 
to  31,101 ;  and  in  Esdraa  to  33,934  :  although  these  three  books  agree  in 
stating  it  at  42,360.     See  Ezr.  ii.  64.  Neh.  vii.  66.  Esdr.  v.  41.] 

[b)  Table  of  places  in  Esdras  parallel  with  II  Chronicles,  Ezra,  and 
?fehemiah. 

II  Chron.  xxxv.  1 — xxxvi.  21. 
Ezr.  i.  1—11. 
"     iv.  7—14. 
a  fabulous  interpolation. 
Ezr.  ii.  1 — iv.  5. 
"     V.  1 — ^x.  44. 
Neh.  vii.  73— viii  12.] 

§  61.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Nehemiah. 

Nehemiah,  cupbearer  to  Artaxerxes  king  of  the  Persians,  hearing 
of  the  melancholy  condition  of  Jerusalem,  obtains  permission  to  for- 
tify the  city.  Going  to  Judsa,  he  executes  his  commission,  notwith- 
standing the  opposition  of  the  Samaritans  :  he  shows  himself  a  friend 
of  the  poor  by  promoting  a  general  remission  of  debts,  and  behaves 
in  a  very  magnanimous  manner  ;  i — vi.  19.  Afterwards,  while  pro- 
secuting his  design  of  increasing  the  number  of  inhabitants,  he  dis- 
covers a  fragment  of  history  of  a  former  age,  containing  a  list  of 
those  who  had  returned  to  Judaea  in  the  reign  of  Cyrus  ;  which  he 
inserts  in  his  book  entire  together  with  an  account  of  some  circum- 
stances of  Ezra's  time,  which  he  had  found  in  the  same  or  in  some 
other  document :  vii.  1 — x.  41.  (39.).  One  of  the  Hebrews  out  of 
ten  is  chosen  by  lot  to  settle  in  Jerusalem,  c.  xi.  Then  follows  a  hst 
of  priests  and  Levites  who  had  come  to  Jerusalem  under  Cyrus,  a 
genealogical  table  of  the  high  priests  from  Joshua  to  Jaddua,  and  q 
catalogue  of  the  chief  heads  of  the  priests  and  Levites :  xii.  1 — 26. 
These  are  succeeded  by  an  account  of  the  dedication  of  the  city  wall, 
and  of  the  appointment  of  officers  over  the  dues  of  the  priests  and 
Levites :  jiii.  27 — 47. At  the  expiration  of  twelve  years,  Nehe» 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  279 

miah  returned  to  Persia,  and  after  some  time,  comes  again  to  Judaea, 
and  reforms  some  prevalent  abuses,  especially  the  profanation  of  the 
Sabbath,  the  withholding  of  tithes,  and  intermarriages  with  foreign- 
ers :  c.  xiii. 

§  62.     The  Artaxerxes  of  Nehemiak  is  Artaxerxes  Langimanus^. 

The  order  of  history  shows  that  the  Artaxerxes  to  whom  Nehe- 
miah  was  cupbearer,  was  Artaxerxes  Longimanus,  and  the  contents 
of  the  book  confirm  this  opinion.  Artaxerxes  reigned  forty-one 
years,  (464 — 424  B.  C),  and  Nehemiah  went  to  Jerusalem  in  the 
twentieth  year  of  his  reign,  (444  B.  C),  and  therefore  thirty-three 
years  after  Ezra.  During  this  interval  the  affairs  of  Judaea,  which 
had  been  brought  into  considerable  regularity  by  Ezra,  had  fallen 
again  into  confusion  ;  particularly  as  in  the  years  459  and  458  B.  C. 
two  Persian  armies  had  made  Syria  and  Phoenicia  their  place  of  ren- 
dezvous, and  Megabyzes  at  the  head  of  a  great  army,  had  enga- 
ged Artaxerxes  in  Syria,  448  and  447  B.  C.  Diodorus  Siculus, 
Lib.  XI.  c.  71,  74,  77.  Lib.  XIL  c.  33,  34.  Ctesias  in  Persicis. 
§  32.  36—89. 

Xerxes,  •whom  Josephus  identifies  with  the  Artaxerxes  of  Nehemiah, 
reigned  only  twenty-one  years ;  whereas  the  thirty-second  year  of  Ar- 
taxerxes is  mentioned,  Neh.  xiii.  6. Some  suppose  Artaxerxes  Mne- 

mon  to  have  been  the  monarch  to  whom  Nehemiah  was  cupbearer.  But 
in  his  reign  Persian  armies  were  traversing  Syria  in  their  way  to  Egypt, 
from  the  year  377  to  374  B,  C,  i.  e.  according  to  the  supposition,  from 
the  6th  to  the  9th  of  Nehemiah ;  and  surely  the  author  would  not  have 
altogether  omitted  such  a  fact.  Add  to  this,  that  in  the  year  373  B.  C, 
viz.  on  the  same  supposition,  the  10th  of  Nehemiah,  the  death  of  Joiada 
the  high  priest  took  place  ;  whereas  he  was  alive  during  the  the  second 
visit  of  Nehemiah.  Lastly,  at  the  time  referred  to,  Jonathan  the  high 
priest  killed  his  brother  in  the  temple ;  a  deed  concerning  which  Nehe- 
miah would  never  have  been  silent,  had  it  taken  place  in  hi^  days. 

§  63.     The  year  of  Nehemiah'' s  second  visit  to  Jerusalem. 

It  is  the  general  opinion  that  Nehemiah  went  back  again  to  Jerusa- 
lem the  very  next  year  after  his  return  to  Artaxerxes,  i.  e.  431  B.  C. 
But  from  Neh.  xiii.,  it  is  clear  that  an  interval  of  about  twenty  or 
twenty-four  years  must  have  elapsed  before  he  went  back  to  Jerusa- 


280  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO   EACH   BOOK 

lem,  that  is  to  say,  it  was  not  until  412  or  408  B.  C.[a]  1)  The 
abuses  which  Nehemiah  found  prevalent  on  his  return,  could  not 
have  crept  in  during  a  single  year  :  such,  for  instance,  as  the  habitual 
profanation  of  the  sabbath  ;  the  constant  withholding  of  tithes  during 
so  long  a  time  that  the  Levites  and  priests  were  obliged  to  embrace 
other  professions  for  a  maintenance  ;  and  marriages  with  foreigners 
of  such  old  standing  that  from  them  had  arisen  bearded  sons,[h]  and 
therefore  at  least  twenty  years  of  age,  Neh.  xiii.  24.  s.  It  is  indeed 
said  that  Nehemiah  returned  D'D'  |^j3D ;  but  it  is  certain  that  this 

expression  is  used  not  only  for  a  year,  but  also  for  a  longer  space  of 

time 2)  At  this  second  visit  of  Nehemiah,  Joiada  was  the  high 

priest,  Neh.  xiii.  28  :[c]  but,  according  to  the  Alexandrine  chroni- 
cle, he  succeeded  Eliashib  in  the  year  412  B.  C.  Nehemiah,  there- 
fore, did  not  revisit  Judaea  before  that  year,  consequently,  not  until 
after  the  twentieth  year  from  his  return  to  Persia  ;  perhaps  about 

the  year  410  or  408  B.  C. 3)  This  considerable  interval  between 

the  return  of  Nehemiah  to  Persia  and  his  second  visit  to  Judaea, 
agrees  well  with  his  age.  For  when  he  first  left  Persia,  he  was  the 
king's  cupbearer,  and  must  therefore  have  been  a  young  man  ; 
and  as  Josephus  tells  us  that  be  hved  to  a  great  age,  he  may  well  be 
supposed  to  have  reached  his  90th  or  100th  year,  and  to  have  been 
yet  living  in  the  year  380  or  370  B.C.;  in  which  case  he  could  have 
mentioned  not  only  Darius  Nothus,  but  also  Jaddua  the  high  priest. 
Neh.  xii.  22.  [d] 

Josephus,  Ant.  Jud.  XI.  viii.  2,  by  a  lapse  of  memory  has  confounded 
Darius  Nothus  with  Darius  Codomannus,  and  has  placed  Sanballat,  the 
chief  of  the  Samaritans,  in  the  age  of  the  latter.[c]  Hence,  by  a  new  er- 
ror, he  has  made  the  person  who,  according  to  Nehemiah,  c.  xiii.  28.  was 
the  son  of  Joiada  and  son-in-law  of  Sanballat,  and  whom  he  calls  Manas- 
ses,  the  son  of  Jaddua.  Those  writers,  therefore,  who  have  placed  im- 
plicit reliance  on  Josephus  have  introduced  great  confusion  into  the  book 
of  Nehemiah.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  II.  Sect.  I.  §  63.  S.  291.  f.  and 
Archaeol.  II  Th.  I.  B.  ^i  64.  S.  378.  ff. 

[a)  Prideaux,  Connex.  P.  I.  B.  VI.  anno  428,  allows  Jive  years  for 
Nehemiah's  continuance  at  the  Persian  court,  and  fixes  his  return  to  Je- 
rusalem in  428  B.  C.  Hales,  Anal,  of  Chron.  II.  530.  places  thr 
latter  in  424  B.  C.  '  eight  years,  at  the  soonest,'  after  he  had  left  Jeru- 
salem.    TV.] 


UF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEiNT.  2{)1 

[6)  This  does  not  necessarily  follow  from  the  passage  cited.  The  per- 
sons from  whom  Nehemiah  '  plucked  off  the  hair'  were  probably  the 
transgressing  Jews  themselves.     TV.] 

[c)  Not  Eliashib,  as  Michaelis  has  explained  this  verse,  for  such  is  not 
the  usus  loquendi  in  such  cases.] 

[d)  See  on  the  contrary  Prid,  Conn.  P.  I.  B.  V.  Vol.  I.  p.  298,  s.  ed. 
1718.     Tr.] 

[e)  See  Prid.  Conn.  P.  I.  B.  V.  Vol.  I.  p.  301.  ss.     Tr.] 

§  64.     Nehemiah  was  the  author  of  the  hooh. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  this  honk  was  written  by  Nehemiah, 
for  the  author  speaks  in  his  person,  and  preserves  throughout  a  style 
and  mode  of  narration  altogether  characteristic  of  Nehemiah.  Comp. 
c.  V.  19.  xiii.  14,  22,  31.  iii.  6.  (5.)  vi.  14. [a]  That  the  fragment 
respecting  the  return  from  the  captivity,  c.  vii.  6 — x.  40.  which,  as 
has  been  already  said,  was  also  annexed  to  the  third  book  of  Ezra, 
should  differ  in  style  from  the  remainder  of  the  work,  is  not  surpri- 
sing. For  as  it  is  a  document  which  Nehemiah  found  and  incorpo- 
rated into  his  own  book,  it  is  of  course  older  than  the  rest,  [b]  That 
the  name  of  Nehemiah  occurs  in  c.  viii.  9.  and  x.  2,  is  no  objection  ; 
the  insertion  being  plainly  the  work  of  some  ignorant  transcriber, 
who,  not  considering  that  the  whole  piece  is  a  fragment  of  an  earlier 
date,  supplied  what  he  supposed  to  be  an  omission  in  Nehemiah's 

own  history. As  Nehemiah  has  introduced  this  document  of  an 

earlier  age,  it  is  reasonable  to  conclude  that  he  would  not  neglect 
that  interval  of  time  which  elapsed  between  his  return  to  Persia  and 
his  second  visit  to  Judea.  No  doubt,  therefore,  the  passage  in  c. 
xii.  1 — 26.  was  inserted  by  him.[c]  The  style  indeed  is  different, 
but  that  is  easily  explained  on  the  supposition  that  Nehemiah  has 
made  his  extracts  from  the  annals  of  that  period  nearly  in  their  own 
words  (comp.  v.  23),  and  then  pursued  the  thread  of  his  own  history 

It  has  already  been  observed  that  the  Jews  join  the  book  of  Nehemiah 
to  that  of  Ezra ;  hence  in  the  Vulgate  the  book  of  Nehemiah  is  entitled 
the  Second  Book  of  Ezra  or  Esdras.[rf] 

[a)  Comp.  also  c.  ii.  3, 12, 18,20.  iii.  36.  s.  (iv.  4,  5.)  v.  6.  ss.,  9,  14.  ss. 
vi.  9,  16.  vii.  5.  xii.  40,  45.  xiii.  2,  4,  6, 8, 9,  11,  15.  s.  19,  21,  25,  29.  Tr.] 

[6)  De  Wette  and  Bertholdt  assert  that  the  document  found  by  Nehe- 
miah extends  no  further  than  vii.  73;  and  that  all  that  follow?,  as  far  as 

?6 


282         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

X.  40,  is  a  late  interpolation,  altered  from  Ezra  iii.  Their  opinion,  how- 
ever, being  grounded  on  an  implicit  confidence  in  Josephus  (De  Wette, 
Einleit.  J  197.  anm.  aa.)  and  in  the  mention  of  Nehemiah  (viii.  9.  x.  2.) 
is  of  no  weight.     Tr.] 

[c)  See  on  the  other  hand  Peideaux,  Conn.  P.  I.  B.  V.  Vol.  I.  p.  301. 
who  gives  good  reasons  to  allow  that  it  is  an  interpolation.  Such  is  also 
the  opinion  of  Rambach  (in  loc),  Vitringa  (Obs.  Sacr.  L.  VI.  p.  367), 
Dr  Pijv  (Prol.  Bibl.  (On  the  Canon)  I.  iii.  6.),  Le  Clerc  (in  loc), 
HoRNE  (Introd.  IV.  59.  ed.  4th.)  and  De  Wette  (Einleit  §  197.)— The 
passage  c.  xii.  27 — xiii.  31.  is  most  evidently  from  the  pen  of  Nehemiah, 
abounding  with  the  peculiarities  of  his  style.  That  xii.  44 — xiii.  4.  is 
not  an  interpolation,  as  De  Wette  and  Bertholdt  have  supposed,  is  evi- 
dent from  its  connexion  with  the  context,  and  from  the  occurrence  of  ex- 
pressions peculiar  to  Nehemiah ;  xii.  45.  xiii.  2.  ,  Tr.] 

[d)  Hence  also  the  Apocryphal  books  are  in  the  Vulgate  called  the 
Third  and  Fourth  of  Ezra  or  Esdras.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEN1.  283 


CHAPTER  VI. 


OF   THE    BOOK    OF   ESTirEK. 


§  65.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Esther.  ^ 

Ahastjerus,  king  of  the  Persians,  having  repudiated  his  wife  Vashti, 
because  she  had  refused  to  show  herself  to  his  guests  in  obedience 
to  his  orders,  chose  the  Jewess  Esther  for  his  queen.  Her  kinsman 
Mordecai  daily  frequenting  the  court,  according  to  the  custom  of  the 
Persian  nobles,  within  a  short  time  discovered  a  conspiracy,  and 
through  Esther  gave  information  of  it  to  the  king.  Haman,  who  had 
been  elevated  to  the  rank  of  prime  minister  of  the  kingdom,  was  re- 
fused by  Mordecai  the  prostration  which  the  king  had  commanded 
all  to  render  to  him.  To  revenge  the  insult,  Haman  induces  the 
king  to  publish  an  edict  ordering  all  the  Jews  in  the  whole  kingdom 
to  be  put  to  death  in  one  day.  Upon  hearing  this,  Mordecai  puts  ou 
a  mourning  dress,  publicly  utters  his  lamentations  in  the  streets  of  the 
royal  city  Susa,  and  then  sends  a  messenger  to  Esther  intreating  her 
to  suppUcate  the  king  in  behalf  of  the  Jewish  nation.  Esther,  after  a 
fast  of  three  days  and  repeated  prayers  to  God,  goes  to  the  king,  and 
meets  with  a  gracious  reception,  but  merely  requests  that  the  king 
and  Haman  would  sup  with  her.  During  the  banquet,  Esther  being 
asked  by  the  king  what  petition  she  has  to  make,  again  requests  only 
that  the  king  and  Haman  would  sup  with  her  on  the  next  day.  Ha- 
man puffed  up  with  this  extraordinary  honour,  erects  a  cross  of  the 
height  of  fifty  cubits  at  his  house,  on  which  the  next  day  to  fasten  the 
hated  Mordecai,  who  still  refuses  him  the  honour  of  prostration.  But 
the  king  being  unable  to  sleep  that  night,  orders  the  annals  of  his 
kingdom  to  be  read  to  him ;  and  learning  from  them  the  circumstance 


284         rARTICULAli     1T<TR0DUCTI0>'    TO   EACH    BOOK 

of  the  discovery  of  the  conspiracy,  and  being  told  that  the  discoverer 
had  obtained  no  reward,  in  the  morning  orders  Haman  to  clothe 
Mordecai  in  a  royal  robe,  to  seat  him  upon  the  king's  horse,  and  in 
that  state  to  conduct  him  through  the  city.  In  the  evening,  at  the 
banquet,  Esther  being  again  interrogated  by  the  king  as  to  the  object 
of  her  wishes,  petitions  for  favour  towards  her  people,  and  points  out 
Haman  as  its  enemy.  He  is  immediately  fastened  to  the  cross  which 
he  had  prepared  for  Mordecai ;  while  the  latter,  being  created  in  his 
stead  chief  of  the  royal  governors,  transmits  to  all  the  provinces  the 
king's  orders  that  the  Jews,  on  the  day  which  had  been  fixed  for  their 
massacre,  should  take  arms  and  destroy  their  enemies.  Accordingly, 
on  the  thirteenth  of  the  twelfth  month,  the  Jews  put  to  death  75000 
in  the  provinces  and  500  at  Susa,  and  obtaining  permission  through 
Esther  to  continue  the  work  of  destruction  on  the  succeeding  day, 
they  kill  in  Susa  300  more.  In  commemoration  of  the  event  Morde- 
cai institutes  a  feast,  on  the  thirteenth  and  fourteenth  days  of  the 
twelfth  month,  or  Adar,  by  the  name  of  the  feast  of  Purim  or  Phurim. 
In  conclusion,  the  author  refers  to  the  royal  annals  of  Persia  for  con- 
firmation of  his  account. 

§  66.      Who  is  king  Ahasuerus  ? 

The  Ahasuerus  of  Esther  is  not  Astyages,  who  is  designated  by 
the  same  name  in  Dan.  ix.  1  ;  for  he  was  not  king  of  Persia,  but  of 
Media,  and  his  kingdom  was  not  of  the  extent  which  is  stated  in 

Esth.  i.  1. Nor  is  he  Cambyses,  who  also  bears  the  name  of 

Ahasuerus  in  Ezr.  iv.  6  ;  for  he  was  in  Egypt  in  the  seventh  year  of 
his  reign,  whereas  in  that  year  Ahasuerus  chose  Esther  for  his  queen, 
Esth.  ii.  16  ;  Cambyses,  also,  died  in  the  eighth  year  of  his  reign, 
whereas  Ahasuerus  reigned  more  than  twelve  years. The  Ahasu- 
erus of  the  book  of  Esther  is  Xerxes,  who,  according  to  Persian  cus- 
tom, received  the  name  of  Ahasuerus,  one  who  does  great  things,  on 
account  of  his  great  enterprise  against  the  Greeks.  This  identity  of 
Ahasuerus  is  proved  by  the  sameness  of  character  and  by  the  agree- 
ment of  the  book  of  Esther  with  the  history  of  Xerxes. 1)     The 

Ahasuerus  of  Esther  is  a  luxurious,  weak,  and  cruel  prince  ;  which  is 

exactly  the  character  given  to  Xerxes  by  all  the  ancients,  [a] 

2)  Ahasuerus  (Esth.  i.  3.)  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign  feasted  during 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  285 

a  hundred  and  eighty  days  with  all  his'nobles  and  governors  of  provin- 
ces. Now  Xerxes  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign,  as  Herodotus 
informs  us,  B.  VI.  §  11  and  19,  consulted  his  nobles  and  governors  of 
provinces  in  relation  to  the  expedition  into  Greece :  as  it  was  the 
practice  of  the  Persians  to  hold  their  councils  during  feasts,  he  must 
have  given  somc'On  this  occasion,  and  the  whole  number  of  governors 
being  too  great  to  convene  at  once  these  entertainments  may  easily 
have  been  continued  during  180  days.  The  chief  design  of  them  is 
not  mentioned  by  the  author  of  the  book  of  Esther,  either  because 
he  was  ignorant  of  it,  or  because  it  had  no  connexion  with  his  "his- 

history. 3)     Ahasuerus  in  the  seventh  year  of  his  reign,  and  tenth 

month,  chose  Esther  as  his  queen  ;  and  Xerxes  in  the  seventh  year 
of  his  reign,  having  returned  to  Persia  from  his  expedition  into 
Greece,   endeavoured  to  remove  the  chagrin  arising  from  its  failure 

by  luxurious  pleasures. 4)     Ahasuerus  imposed  a  new  tribute 

Esth.  x.  1  ;  and  Xerxes  after  his  expedition  was  in  want  of  finances, 
on  which  account  he  even  took  away  the  golden  statue  from  Baby- 
Ion.  [6] 

[a)  Herodot  hi.  89—97.  VI.  30,  41,  119  :  Plutarch  in  Vit.  Ar- 
taxerxis :  ^Elian  Var.  Hist.  VI.  14 :  Athenaeus  Deipuos.  Lib.  VIII : 
Valerius  Maximus  Memorab.  IX.  1 :  Cicero  Tusc.  Quest.  V.  7 : 
Germ.  Introd.  p.  300—302.] 

[6)  Hegai  is  mentioned  in  Esth.  ii.  8,  as  superintendent  of  the  harem, 
and  Ctesias  (in  Persicis,  24.)  speaks  of  a  person  in  the  service  of  Xerxes 
at  Thermopylae  who  was  named  Haejjias.  If  Hamestris  the  wife  of 
Xerxes  were  a  different  person  from  Esther,  the  cruelty  of  her  character 
as  illustrated  in  Herodotps  (ix  108 — 112)  shows  the  spirit  of  Xerxes' 
harem,  with  which  the  sanguinary  disposition  of  Esther  entirely  agrees. 
Comp.  Jdstis  Vermischte  Abhandlungen  I  Th.  S.  38 — 87. 

If  it  should  be  objected  that  Mordecai  could  not  have  lived  so  late  as 
the  reign  of  Xerxes,  since  in  Esth.  ii.  6,  he  is  said  to  have  been  made  a 
prisoner  by  Nebuchadnezzar;  the  reply  is,  that  it  is  not  Mordecai  who  is 

there  meant,  butKish  his  greatgrandfather. And  if  it  should  be  asked 

why  Ezra,  who  lived  at  the  time,  did  not  mention  this  history .'  it  may 
easily  be  answered  :  for  in  the  seventh  year  of  the  reign  of  Xerxes,  Ezra 
took  the  resolution  to  go  to  Jerusalem,  and  arrived  there  in  the  fifth 
month  (Ezr.  vii.  8)  ;  whereas  it  was  not  until  the  tenth  month  of  that 
year  that  Esther  was  made  known  as  queen,  (Esth.  ii.  16,)  and  the  mat- 


280    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

ters  afterwards  related  did  not  take  place  until  the  twelfth  year  of  Xerxe? 
(Esth.  iii.  7)  when  Ezra  was  probably  dead.] 

[The  opinion  espoused  by  Jahn  in  this  section  has  been  maintained  by 
ScALiGER  (De  Emend.  Temp.  Lib.  VI.  and  Animadv.  in  Euseb.  p.  101 
ss.)  ;  by  Drusius  (Annot.  in  loc.)  ;  by  Pfeiffer  (Dub.  Vexat.  ad 
Esth.  i.  1.) ;  by  Carpzov  (Introd.  p.  356.  ss.)  ;  by  JusTi  (in  Eichhorns 
Repert  Th.  XV.  S.  1 — 38.  and  Jcstis  Vermischten  Abhandlungen,  I.  Th. 
No.  2.)  ;  by  Eichhorh  (Einleit.  II.  ^  508  S.  637.  ff.)  ;  and  by  Ber- 
THOLDT  (Einleit  V.  Th.  S.  2422.  ff.).-^^ — That  the  Ahasuerus  of  Esther 
is  Astyages  has  been  maintained  by  G.  Mercator,  R.  Gualther, 

and  Melchior  Canus. That  he  is  Cyaxares  is  the  opinion  of  Span- 

HEIM  (0pp.  Tom.  I.  c.  302)   to  which  opinion  Dtr  Pin  inclines  (Diss. 

Prelim.  [On  the  Canon.]  Lib.  I.  c.  iii.  J  7.). That  he  is  Cambyses  is  the 

opinion  of  the  Jews.  (Seder  01am  Rabba  c.  29 ;  Seder  01am  Suta 
p.  108  ed.  Meyeri,),  and  of  the  old  interpreters  De  Ltra,  Vatablcs, 

and  Geneerard. Usher  (Annals,  p.  112.  ss.)  and  Calovius  (Bibl. 

Illustr.  I.  IIG.)  are  of  opinion  that  Darius  Hystaspes  is  the  person  refer- 
red to. Lastly,  Pfiideaux  (Connex.  P.  I.  B.  IV.  anno  465,  and  B. 

V.  anno  463,  462,)  produces  strong  arguments  to  show  that  he  is  Ar- 
taxtrxes  Longimanus;  which  opinion  is  supported  by  Petavips 
(Doct.  Temp.  XII.  27.),  Lightfoot  (Opp.  I.  p.  137.  ss.  ed.  Rot.)  Le 
Clerc  (Comm.  in  Esth.  i.  1.)  and  Hales  (Anal.  II.  524.).    TV.] 

§  67.     Difficulties  in  the  Book  of  Esther. 

The  difficulties  of  this  book,  which  have  been  much  exaggerated 
of  late,  admit  of  satisfactory  solutions. 

I.  That  the  decrees  of  the  kings  of  Persia  were  irrevocable,  is  not 
a  representation  peculiar  to  this  book,  (i.  19);  it  is  made  also  in 
Dan.  vi.  9,  16.  and  is  declared  by  Chardin,  (Voy.  Tom.  III.  p.  418.) 
to  be  the  case  in  Persia  even  at  present,  and  by  Luedeke,  (Be- 
schreib.  des  Turkisch.  Reichs.  Th.  I.  S.  275.)  in  the  Turkish  em- 
pire also.  Mordecai,  therefore,  was  unable  to  revoke  the  royal  de- 
cree which  had  been  sent  by  Haman  to  the  provinces,  and  in  order 
to  rescue  the  Jews  a  contrary  decree  was  necessary,  authorizing 

them  to  put  their  enemies  to  death The  cruelty  of  these  decrees 

does  not  destroy  the  truth  of  the  account ;  otherwise  we  must  erase 
all  cruel  decrees  from  history. Admitting  that  Mordecai,  and  es- 
pecially Esther,  who  asked  and  obtained  from  the  king  a  second  day 
of  massacre  in  the  city  Susa,  are  sanguinary  :  this  is  no  difficulty  : 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  287 

for  it  is  not  saints,  but  deliverers  of  the  Jews,  that  the  book  pre- 
sents to  us.  » 

II.  That  Esther  could  not  long  conceal  her  kindred,  as  she  was  di- 
rected to  do  by  Mordecai,  is  readily  admitted  :  for  in  fact  it  was  not 
long  concealed,  but  c.  vii.  4.  viii.  6.  she  confesses  herself  a  Jewess, 
and  takes  it  for  granted  that  this  was  previously  known  from  somo 
other  source.  If  any  should  suppose  that  Haman  would  not  have 
formed  his  sanguinary  schemes  against  the  Jews,  if  he  had  been 
acquainted  with  the  queen's  extraction,  they  are  mistaken  ;  for  his 
insight  into  character  would  have  taught  him  that  Esther,  raised  to 
the  very  summit  of  honour  by  the  king  of  Persia,  would  have  become 
indifferent  to  the  fortunes  of  her  nation  ;  and,  apparently  in  the  same 
view,  we  find  Mordecai  warns  her  not  to  think  herself  permanently 
secure  if  she  should  neglect  the  fate  of  her  kindred  and  nation. 

III.  The  reason  of  Mordecai' s  refusal  to  adore  or  prostrate  him- 
self to  Haman,  is  not  indeed  given  ;  but  no  doubt  a  sufficient  one 
existed.  It  seems  that  Mordecai  knew  him  to  have  been  a  party  in 
the  conspiracy  against  the  king,  or  at  least  privy  to  it.  See  the 
apocryphal  book  of  Esther,  xii.  6. 

IV.  Haman's  design  of  revenging  the  insolence  or  rusticity  of  Mor- 
decai upon  all  his  nation,  shows  indeed  an  extraordinarily  vindictive 
disposition  ;  but  it  is  not  on  that  account  to  be  considered  as  either 
false  or  improbable ;  it  were  to  be  wished  that  history  afforded  us 
no  similar  instance. 

V.  A  very  obvious  reason  can  be  assigned  for  Haman's  postponing 
his  revenge  from  the  first  to  the  last  month  of  the  year  ;  namely,  the 
superstitious  practice,  common  even  yet  in  the  East,  of  doing  nothing 
without  previously  determining  by  lot  the  time  most  favourable  for  the 
undertaking.  Having  therefore  ascertained  in  this  manner  the 
month  and  day  most  suitable  for  the  destruction  of  the  Jews,  he  de- 
ferred his  revenge  until  the  destined  time  arrived. 

VI.  The  narrative,  it  must  be  confessed,  does  not  state  that  the 
Jews  prepared  tofiy  from  the  impending  massacre,  but  only  that  they 
lamented.  But  neither  does  it  state  that  they  did  not  prepare  to  fly, 
and  who  can  deny  that  the  cause  of  their  lamentation  may  have  been 
the  necessity  to  which  they  were  subjected  of  changing  their  place  of 
residence  ? To  suppose  that  the  Jews  would  take  up  ai-ms  in  self 


288         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO   EACH    BOOK 

defence,  would  be  to  confound  the  hardy  soldiers  of  the  Maccabees 
under  the  tottering  kingdom  of  Syria,  with  the  feeble  Jews  under  the 
very  powerful  empire  of  Persia. 

VII.  The  prohibition  to  approach  the  king  uncalled  is  by  no  means 
singular  ;  for  it  prevails  even  now  in  Asia. 

VIII.  There  is  no  force  in  the  objection  that  as  Esther's  intention 
was  to  allure  the  monarch  by  her  charms,  a  three  day'' s  fast  would 
have  diminished  the  probabihty  of  her  success,  by  discolouring  the 
lips,  making  the  cheeks  pale,  and  causing  an  unpleasant  breath.  For 
in  the  warm  chmate  of  Persia  fasting  makes  no  such  inroads  on  the 
personal  appearance  ;  especially  such  fasting  as  is  practised  by  the 
orientals,  who  merely  abstain  from  food  from  sunrise  to  sunset,  and 
then  satisfy  their  hunger,  which  in  hot  climates  is  never  very  great 
during  the  day,  with  copious  repasts. 

IX.  That  Esther,  when  questioned  by  the  king  as  to  the  object  of 
her  wishes,  should  not  immediately,  or  even  at  the  first  banquet,  prefer 
her  petition  in  behalf  of  the  Jews,  but  merely  invite  the  king  to  sup 
with  her,  was  without  doubt  the  effect  of  a  real  or  assumed  modesty, 
which  so  well  becomes  a  person  of  her  sex,  and  would  contribute  not 
a  little  to  fix  upon  her  the  affections  of  the  monarch,  and  render  him 
propitious  to  her  requests,  however  great. 

X.  Lastly,  that  none  of  the  Jews  were  slain  in  the  conflict  witii 
their  enemies,  is  not  incredible,  since  they  would  certainly  avoid  at- 
tacking a  stronger  party.  But  there  is  no  objection  to  supposing  this 
statement  to  be  hyperbolical ;  such  often  occur  in  other  histories, 
where  great  battles  are  said  to  have  taken  place  without  any  loss  on 
the  side  of  the  victors. [a] 

These  solutions  are  drawn  from  the  manners  of  the  orientals  and  fr«m 
the  circumstances  of  the  history.  It  would  be  unreasonable,  therefore,  to 
say  that  they  do  not  render  the  narrative  probable,  but  merely  prove  its 
possibility. Although  this  is  enough  ;  since  the  testimony  of  the  wri- 
ter, and  his  reference  to  the  royal  archives,  abundantly  attest  the  truth 
of  the  facts  which  he  relates. 

[a)  The  author  might  have  given  a  readier  answer  to  this  objection, 
namely,  that  the  book  of  Esther  does  not  say  any  thing  which  should  lead 
♦o  the  conclusion  that  the  Jews  were  entirely  exempt  from  los?.     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  289 

§  68.     Author  and  age  of  the  Booh  of  Esther. 

Some  have  inferred  from  Esth.  ix.  20,  that  Mordecai  wrote  the 
book,  not  observing  that  the  passage  does  not  relate  to  the  whole 
book,  but  merely  to  the  letters  which  Mordecai  addressed  to  the  Jews 
respecting  the  observance  of  the  feast  of  Purira.  Others,  who  have 
ascr'bed  the  book  to  Ezra,  have  not  attended  to  the  extraordinary 
dissimilarity  of  the  style.  The  great  synagogue  to  which  some  have 
attributed  it,  is  nothing  but  a  fiction  of  the  Talmudists.  Whoever 
may  have  been  the  author,  the  work  has  this  peculiarity  ;  that,  con- 
trary to  the  universal  practice  of  the  Hebrews,  it  does  not  refer  the 
reader  to  the  Deity,  or  even  mention  his  name,  [a]  The  age  of  the 
author  is  unknown  ;  but  from  his  referring  to  the  annals  of  the  Per- 
sian kings-  it  is  certain  that  he  wrote  before  the  overthrow  of  that 
monarchy.  The  most  probable  opinion  is  that  the  book  was  written 
a  short  time  after  the  transactions  which  it  records,  since  the  author 
was  acquainted  with  several  minute  circumstances  relating  to  them  : 
Esth.  v.  10.  ix.  7 — 10.  The  subscription  of  the  Alexandrine  version 
of  this  book,  which  speaks  of  a  certain  Dositheus  bringing  the  letter 
of  Mordecai  respecting  the  festival  of  Purim  to  Egypt  during  the 
fourth  year  of  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra,  is,  like  all  other  subscription^^ 
of  books  by  later  hands,  very  suspicious,  and  no  proof  that  the  author 
lived  in  a  recent  age.  [i] 

[a)  On  this  account  De  Wettk,  who  objects  to  all  the  other  book? 
their  Theocratico-mythological  spirit,  condemns  this  for  its  want  of  re- 
ligion !     Tr.] 

[6)  De  Wette  supports  the  opinion  that  the  work  professes  to  be 
written  by  Mordecai,  bringing  c.  ix.  32.  comp.  v.  20,  as  proof.  He  sup- 
poses that  the  real  author  lived  in  the  Persian  empire,  as  is  shown  by  hi? 
acquaintance  with  its  history  and  customs,  (i.  1,  10,  14,  15,  19.  ii.  8.  iii. 
7.  iv.  11.  i.  1.  ii.  9,)  by  his  reference  to  its  annals  (x.  2.),  and  by  the  ab- 
sence of  all  notice  of  Judea  and  Jerusalem.  He  adds  that  the  explana- 
tions of  ancient  manners  and  customs  (viii.  8.  i.  13.  i.  1,)  fix  the  age  of 
the  author  subsequently  to  the  downfal  of  the  Persian  monarchy.     Tr.] 

§69.     Text  of  the  Book  of  Esther. 

The  Hebrew  text  of  this  book  docs  not  indeed  exhibit  manifest  er- 
rors, nor  are  its  various  readings  more  nnmprons  than  thope  of  otlier 

37 


290         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

books  ;  but  it  differs  in  many  places  from  the  Alexandrine  version, 
which  not  only  relates  some  things  differently,  but  also  has  long  ad- 
ditions. These  the  other  Greek  interpreters  seem  to  have  copied 
from  that  version;  for  which  reason  Jerome,  in  his  preface  to 
Esther,  complains  that  the  book  has  been  corrupted  by  its  various 
translators,  [a] 

[a)  The  additions  contained  in  the  Alexandrine  version  were  placed 
by  Jerome  at  the  end  of  his  translation  of  the  book.  By  Luther  and 
other  protestants  they  are  ranked  as  a  separate  apocryphal  book.     They 

were  known  to  Josephus  ;   Ant.  Jud.  XI.  vi.  1. For  an  account  of 

their  contents,  &c.  see  §  232.  ss.     Tr.] 

§  70.     Whether  the  Booh  of  Esther  is  canonical. 

It  has  already  been  stated  (Part.  I.  §  28),  that  the  book  of  Esther 
is  omitted  in  the  canon  of  Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis.  This  is  the 
case  also  in  those  of  Gregory  Nazianzen  (Opp.  T.  II.  p  98),  of 
Amphilochius  (in  lambis  ad  Seleuc.  int.  Opp.  Greg.  Naz.  T.  II. 
p.  194),  of  Athanasius  (Epist.  fest.),  of  the  author  of  the  Synopsis 
improperly  ascribed  to  Athanasius,  of  Leontius,  of  Junilius,  and  of 
both  the  NiCEPHORi.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  p.  316.  This  led  Sixxus 
Senensis,  in  his  Bibhotheca  Sacra,  to  place  Esther  among  the 
deutero-canonical  books.  But  since  Josephus  introduces  the  con- 
tents of  the  work  together  with  many  additions  into  his  Antiqui- 
ties, and  Aquila,  Symmachus  and  Theodotion  have  translated  it  as 
a  canonical  book  of  the  Jews,  and  Origen,  Cyril  of  Jerusalem, 
Epiphanius,  and  Jerome  attest  that  the  Jews  admitted  it  into  the  ca- 
non ;  the  opinion  of  Sixtus  has  not  received  the  sanction  of  the 
learned.     See  Dr  Pin,  Proleg.  B.  I.  c.  i.  §  5. 


4^h. 


OP    THK    OLD    TESTAMENT.  291 


SECTION  II. 


OF    THE    PROPHETS. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OF    PROPHECIES. 


§  71.     Of  Prophecies  in  general,  [a] 

Predictions  of  future  events  were  formerly  received  with  rever- 
ence everywhere,  and  by  every  nation,  and  obtained  at  length  the  ap- 
probation even  of  philosophers.  Divination  was  distinguished  into 
two  kinds,  artificial  and  natural:*  the  former  was  derived  from  natu- 
ral objects,  such  as  omens  prodigies,  entrails  of  victims,  monsters, 
thunder  and  lightning,  stars,  lots,  &lc.  ;  the  latter  was  thought  to  pro- 
ceed from  some  divine  inspiration  and  influence.  In  the  one,  the 
Deity  was  supposed  to  announce  future  events  by  matters  of  fact ;  in 
the  other  by  revelation.  Both,  therefore,  were  attributed  to  the  im- 
mediate agency  of  the  divinity  ;  for  in  the  first  kind,  the  use  of  art  was 
merely  to  interpret  a  revelation  made  through  matters  of  fact,  by  ob- 
serving their  signification  during  a  long  course  of  time  :  Cicero  de 
Divinat.  I.  6,  18,  30.  Hence  other  conjectures  concerning  the  fu- 
ture, which  were  made  from  mere  natural  indications,  such  as  those 
of  physicians  respecting  the  recovery  or  the  death  of  a  sick  man  from 

[*  Or  rather  not  artificial,  ars-xyoc; ;  for  both  were  considered  as  supernatural.] 


292  PATITICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

the  symptoms  of  his  disease,  or  those  of  farmers  respecting  future 
rains  or  abundant  crops  from  external  signs,  were  carefully  distin- 
guished from  divination.  Persons  who  were  successful  in  foretelling 
things  in  this  manner,  were  called  prudentes  or  providentes,  men  of 

sagacity  and  foresight,  noi\  ait^s,  prophets  :  Cic.  de  Divin.  I.  49. 

Hence  it  appears  that  they  are  altogether  mistaken  who  suppose  that 
the  ancients  did  not  accurately  distinguish  conjectures  of  any  kind  re- 
specting future  events  from  predictions  which  are  derived  from  the 
immediate  agency  of  God.  This  is  mentioned  in  express  words  by 
ancient  writers.  Thus  in  Cic.  de  Divin.  I.  30,  Quintus,  after  speak- 
ing of  dreams,  proceeds  as  follows  ;  "  There  is  in  the  mind  a  presen- 
timent of  the  future,  which  is  infused  and  maintained  therein  by  some 
other  agent,  by  the  divinity.  If  it  arises  to  a  high  degree  of  vehe- 
mence and  ardour,  it  is  called  a  divine  rapture,  when  the  soul,  ab- 
stracted from  the  body,  is  strongly  agitated  by  divine  inspirations."* 
Plutarch  also  (de  Pythiae  oraculis  §  7.  p.  257.  Vol.  TX.)  contends 
that  Apollo  supplied  the  Pythoness  with  the  knowledge  of  future 
events,  but  not  with  the  poetry  in  which  these  were  announced. 
This  he  supposes  to  originate  with  the  Pythoness,  and  therefore  main- 
tains that  any  want  of  elegance  in  it  is  not  to  be  imputed  to  Apollo 
but  to  her  ;  just  as  any  distorted  letters,  in  which  the  Pythoness 
might  record  the  knowledge  of  future  events  revealed  to  her,  would 
be  her  work,  and  not  Apollo's.     Comp.  Herodotus,  H.  33. 

[a)  See  WiTSii  Miscellanea  Sacra,  Lib.  I ;  Carpzovii  Introd.  P.  II. 
c.  i.  pp.  1 — 85  ;  SHfeULocK's  Discourses  on  Prophecy ;  Hurd  on  Pro- 
phecy ;  Smith's  Dissertation  on  Prophecy,  in  Watson's  Tracts  Vol.  IV. 
pp.  297  ss.  ed.  2d  ;  Horsley's  Sermons,  Serm.  15, 16,  17, 18  ;  and  the  Rev. 
John  Davison's  Discourses  on  Prophecy.  A  brief  statement  of  the 
opinions  and  aberrations  of  many  of  the  German  divines  and  critics  on 
this  subject  may  be  found  in  Rose's  View  of  the  State  of  Protestantism 
in  Germany.  App.  pp.  141.  ss.     TV.] 

[ft)  The  opinions  of  the  ancients  respecting^  oracles,  and  many  of  the 
distinctive  characteristics  of  the  latter,  may  be  learned  from  Van  Dale, 
De  Oraculis  veterum  Ethnicorum,  and  Jortin,  Remarks  on  Ecclesias- 
tical History  Vol.  I.  pp.84 — 116.  ed.  1803.  Comp.  also  Pottek's 
Antiquities  of  Greece,  B.  II.  c.  vii — xviii.     Tr.] 

*  "  luest  igilur  animis  praesagitio  extriusecus  injecta  atque  inclosa  diTinitns,  ea  si 
•  cxarserit  acrius,  furor  appellatur,  cum  a  corpore  animus  abstractus  diviao  iflstioctu 
concitatur." 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  •  293 

§  72.     Origin  of  Faith  in  Prophecies. 

The  reason  which  induced  all  the  nations  of  antiquity  to  put  faith 
in  prophecies  was,  undoubtedly,  their  frequent  inability  to  discern 
what  was  for  fheir  own  interest,  and  their  consciousness  of  needing 
fuller  information.  This  is  acknowledged  by  the  ancient  philoso- 
phers, and  therefore  they  endeavour  to  prove  the  truth  of  divination  ; 
for  this  reason  also  it  is  called  by  Cicero  "  an  excellent  and  salutary 
thing."*  It  is  certain  however  that  this  faith  was  greatly  increased 
by  means  of  superstition  and  imposture.  This  history  proves  ;  but  it 
does  not  point  out  the  source  whence  faith  in  predictions  originated, 
or  what  it  was  iha.tji?'st  induced  men,  when  conscious  of  their  own 
imbecility,  to  believe  that  the  deity  would  reveal  to  them  the  future. 

Some  suppose  that  it  was  superstition  that  first  produced  this  faith 
in  predictions  ;  others,  that  it  was  imposture  ;  others,  that  it  was  su- 
perstition supported  by  imposture.  Others  again  derive  it  from  a  de- 
sire to  know  the  future  implanted  naturally  in  man,  which  sagacious 
persons  had  satisfied  by  forming  conjectures  founded  on  natural 
causes  respecting  what  was  about  to  take  place,  and  were  conse- 
quently esteemed  by  an  uncultivated  people  as  divine  men,  who  had 
derived  their  knowledge  of  the  future  from  the  Deity  himself.  But 
although  superstition  imposture,  and  the  desire  of  knowing  the  fu- 
ture, have  all  fostered  a  belief  in  prophecy,  yet  no  one  of  these  princi- 
ples satisfactorily  discloses  its  frst  origin.  Others  therefore  have 
placed  it  in  the  really  divine  revelations  which  we  read  that  the 
patriarchs  received  before  and  after  the  deluge.  This  opinion  is  sup- 
ported by  the  most  ancient  history,  while  all  the  others  rest  upon 
slight  conjectures,  which  are  ilrawn  from  particular  and  comparatively 
very  recent  facts,  and  most  illogically  expended  ic  ujiiversals.  But 
conjectures  are  of  no  value  unless  when  history  is  silent,  and  even 
then  can  only  show  that  a  thing  may  have  been  done  so,  and  perhaps 
was  so.  Besides,  they  are  very  often  falsi  as  appears  from  the  con- 
jectures which  have  been  offered  concerning  points  on  which  history 
gives  certain  evidence,  which  have  been  entirely  at  variance  with  its 
representations,  [a] 

*  "  Magnifica  quidem  res  et  salutaris."   De  Diviuat.  I.  71. 


294  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH   BOOK 

If  the  ancient  faith  in  prophecy  has  in  some  nations  perished  in  the 
course  of  ages,  and  has  been  succeeded  in  the  lapse  of  time  by  a 
faith  in  particular  oracles ;  this  doubtless  has  not  originated  every- 
where from  the  same  cause,  but  those  who  cherished  it  were  through 
their  consciousness  of  imbecility  induced  to  believe  in  predictions 
uttered  by  deceivers,  sometimes  by  imposture,  sometimes  by  super- 
stition, sometimes  by  a  desire  of  knowing  the  future,  and  sometimes 
even  by  fortuitous  circumstances.  Comp.  Herodot.  II.  52,  54 — 58. 
Strabo,  p.  329,  402,  419.  Of  this  particular  faith,  therefore,  it  is 
in  vain  to  seek  an  origin  common  to  all  nations.  Neither  is  it  incum- 
bent on  us  to  point  out  its  origin  in  each  individual  nation  ;  it  is  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose  to  show  that  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible  are  of 
an  entirely  dfferent  kind  from  the  oracles  of  other  nations,  and  that 
they  have  not  originated  either  in  superstition  or  in  imposture  or  in  a 
desire  of  knowing  future  events,  or  in  natural  sagacity,  or  in  chance. 
but  have  been  derived  from  a  divine  revelation. 

[a)  Comp.  Meiners  Gpschichte  des  Ursprung;s  und  Verfalh  der 
Wissenschaften,  I.  Th  S.  147;  Ki.eckers  neue  Priifung  und  Erklarung 
der  vorziiglichsteti  Beweise  fur  die  Wahrheit  und  dcr  gottlich  Ursprung 
des  Christenthums.  I  Th.  S.  435—538.] 


§  73.     The  Prophecies  of  the  Bible  are  not  founded  either  in  super- 
stition or  in  imposture. 

The  divine  prophecies  in  the  Bible  are  continually  opposed  to  the 
predictions,  not  only  of  the  idolaters[a],  but  also  of  the  false  prophets, 
who  pretended  to  be  messengers  of  the  true  God.  And  in  fact,  pro- 
phecies attributed  to  worthless  idols,  who  are  nothing,  and  can  do 
nothing,  must  be  entirely  distinct  from  those  which  are  derived  from 
God,  who  views  every  thing  future  as  present,  and  is  able  to  reveal 
any  thing. 

[T.  External  Circumstances.] 

In  the  first  place,  there  is  a  great  difference  in  their  external  cir- 
cumstances. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  295 

I.  In  the  sacred  writings  not  only  all  prophecy  in  the  name  of  false 
gods,  but  also  all  divination  artificially  drawn  from  omens  and  prodi- 
gies, is  forbidden,  under  pain  of  death.  The  only  sort  of  divination 
which  is  approved  of  is  totally  free  from  superstition. 

II.  The  prophets  of  Jehovah  were  not  fixed  in  any  particular 
place,  as  the  prophets  of  the  Greeks  were  at  Dodona,  Delphi, 
Delos,  &c.  They  were  not  influenced  by  certain  seasons  of  the 
year,  nor  did  they  depend  upon  a  vapour  arising  from  a  subterraneous 
cavern,  as  the  Pythoness.  It  was  not  necessary  for  them  to  eat  the 
fruit  of  laurel  or  to  wear  a  laurel  crown  ;  nor  were  they  seized  with  a 
frenzy.  Without  any  of  these  silly  concomitants,  they  learned  the  his- 
tory of  the  future  from  God,  and  uttered  and  wrote  it  as  they 
learned  it. 

III.  The  prophets  were  not,  hke  the  oracles  and  diviners  of  the 
heathen,  gained  over  by  gifts  and  presents  to  utter  their  predictions  ; 
but  generally  prophesied  unasked,  nay,  even  against  the  wishes  of 
kings,  nobles,  and  people  ;  and  received  no  reward  for  their  predic- 
tions but  threats,  scoffs,  hatred,  persecution  bonds,  imprisonment, 
peril  of  death,  and  even  death  itself;  Isa.  v.  8 — 25.  xxviii.  14,  22. 
xlix.  7—13.  Mic.  ii.  11.  iii.  5—12.  Jer.  xxvi.  1—24.  xv.  10—21. 
XX.  1 — 18.,  &c.  They  were  not,  therefore,  like  the  soothsayers, 
diviners,  augurs,  and  inspectors  of  entrails,  instruments  of  the  princes 
and  magistrates,  by  means  of  which  the  people  were  induced  to  give 
willing  submission  to  the  laws. 

IV.  Oracles  and  diviners  of  all  sorts  were  credulously  received  by 
their  contemporaries,  but  in  time,  as  their  worthlessness  and  fallacy 
became  more  and  more  manifest,  they  lost  all  their  credit,  and  sunk 
into  oblivion.  Comp.  Plutarch  de  defect.  Orac.  Vol.  IX.  pp.  298 — 
385.  ed.  Hutten. — — But  our  prophets  found  their  contemporaries 
incredulous,  and  obtained  credit  after  themselves  were  dead,  when 
deception  became  impossible.  The  fulfilment  of  their  prophecies  in 
later  ages,  proved  that  they  emanated,  not  from  men  lefl  to  their  own 
unassisted  powers,  but  from  God  himself.  In  the  course  of  time  this 
became  so  evident,  that  many  even  of  the  heathens  acknowledged  the 
truth  of  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible,  and  leaving  the  oracles  of  their 
gods,  were  converted  to  Judaism.  "  Opinionum  commenta  delet 
dies,  naturae  judicia  confirmat." 


296    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[o)  For  a  valuable  comparison  of  the  Scriptural  prophecies  witli 
heathen  oracles,  see  Allix's  Reflections  on  the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, c.  iv.  in  Watson's  Tracts,  Vol.  I.  p.  362.  ss,  ed.  2d.     Tr.] 

§  74.  Prophecies  considered  with  respect  to  their  contents. 
'  [11.  Contents.] 
Oracles  and  divinations  1)  were  nothing  more  than  isolated  pre^ 
dictions,  without  any  connexion  ;  2)  they  were  uttered  with  a  view 
to  the  interests  of  particular  individuals  or  states ;  3)  tJiey  related  to 
events  near  at  hand ;  and  4)  they  w?re  so  ambiguous,  that  whatever 
the  event  might  be,  they  would  seem  to  have  predicted  it.  Thus 
Cicero  writes  of  the  famous  oracle  of  Apollo  "  But  now  I  turn  to 
thee,  holy  Apollo  ! — for  Chrysippus  hath  filled  an  entire  volume  with 
thine  oracles,  partly,  as  I  think,  false  ;  partly  true  by  chance,  as  often 
happens  to  discourses  of  every  kind  ;  partly  of  dubious  import,  and 
obscure-  so  that  the  interpreter  needs  interpretation,  and  the  oracle 
itself  oracular  explanation  ;  partly  ambiguous,  and  such  as  require 
the  aid  of  logic."*  He  gives  an  example  relating  to  Pyrrhus,  which,  it 
is  true^  is  fictitious,  but  is  nevertheless  a  fair  specimen  of  the  nature 
of  oracles  :  "  Aio  te,  JEacida  !  Romanos  vincere  posse."  This 
could  not  be  convicted  of  falsehood,  whether  Pyrrhus  conquered  the 
Romans,  or  was  conquered  by  them,  or  concluded  the  war  without 

any  signal  victory  on  either  side. On  the  contrary,  the  prophecies 

contained  in  our  sacred  volume  1 )  are  very  numerous  and  have  an  in- 
timate connexion;  2)  they  tend  to  a  common  object,  which  is  great, 
and  worthy  of  tJte  Deity ;  3)  they  relate  in  part  to  events  which  were 
only  to  come  to  pass  in  remote  futurity ;  and  4)  they  are  not  at  all 
ambiguous  but  determinate,  defined  by  certain  adjuncts,  and  as  far  as 
there  is  any  necessity,  perspicuous.  These  several  particulars  shall 
be  separately  illustrated. 

*  "  Sed  jam  ad  te  venio,  sancte  Apollo  ! — tuis  enim  oraculis  Chrysippus  totum  vo« 
lumen  implevit,  partim  i'alsis,  ut  ego  opinor  ;  partim  casu  veris,  ut  fit  in  omni  ora- 
tione  saepissime  ;  part<m  flcxiloquis  et  obscuris,  ut  interpres  egeat  interprete,  et  sors 
ipsa  ad  series  referenda  sit ;  partim  ambiguis,  et  quae  ad  dialecticam  deferenda  sint." 
De  Divinat.  IT.  66. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  297 

§  75.    (i)    The  Prophecies  of  the  Bible  are  many,  and  con- 
sentaneous. 

The  Bible  contains  prophecies  which  are  not,  hke  the  divinations 
of  the  heathen,  single  predictions  and  scattered  members  devoid  of  all 
connexion,  but  compose  a  collection,  all  the  parts  of  which  are  cohe- 
rent, mutually  related,  and  consistent.  From  Abraham  downwards,  a 
series  of  events  relating  to  the  Hebrews  and  other  nations  is,  during 
more  than  twenty-two  centuries,  foretold  with  wonderful  connexion  ; 
the  most  ancient  prophecies  agreeing  perfectly  with  those  which  are 
more  recent,  while  none  of  either  failed  of  accomplishment.  That 
such  a  series  of  fortuitous  events  should  have  been  sagaciously  con- 
jectured by  different  men,  during  so  long  a  period  of  time,  or  that 
the  correspondence  of  the  events  with  the  predictions  should  have 
been  accidental,  is  inconceivable,  and  contrary  to  the  nature  of  con- 
jecture and  clmnce,  which  in  itself  implies  that  events  should  not 
always  take  place  according  to  rule,  but  only  occasionally,  and  that 
they  should  frequently  disappoint  expectation. 

§  76.    (ii)  Design  of  the  Prophecies. 

The  oracles  of  the  heathens  had  no  other  design  than  to  support 
the  tottering  interests  of  certain  states  or  men,  to  satisfy  the  desire 
of  information  concerning  the  future,  or  to  incline  the  people  to  the 
wishes  of  their  rulers.  The  most  celebrated  oracles  therefore  were 
sometimes  bribed,  as  the  Pythia  was  not  without  reason  reproached 

with  Philippizing. Our  prophecies,  on  the  contrary,  all  tend  to 

one  object,  worthy  of  a  divine  interference, — the  proof  of  the  di- 
vine mission  of  the  prophets,  and,  by  consequence,  the  tiaie  doctrine 
concerning  God,  namely,  that  the  one  only  God,  who  sent  the  pro- 
phets, is  the  omniscient  ruler  of  the  universe,  and  particularly,  that 
he  was  governing  the  Hebrews  in  such  a  manner  that  they  should 
preserve  the  knowledge  of  him  until  the  period  when  it  should  be 
propagated  to  all  nations  by  a  great  messenger  who  was  to  arise  from 
the  posterity  of  David. Miracles  were  not  only  proofs  of  the  di- 
vine mission  of  those  who  performed  them,  but  also  evidences  that 
the  God  who  endowed  these  men  with  such  power  was  the  omni- 
potent governor  of  the  visible  world.     In  like  manner  the  prophecies 

38 


29"8         I'AKTlCC'LAK    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOK 

of  Scripture  were  a  constant  testimony,  not  only  that  the  prophets 
Avere  sent  and  taught  by  God,  but  also  that  this  God  was  the  omnis- 
cient governor  of  the  invisible  world,  or  in  other  words,  of  spiritual 
beings  and  of  the  souls  of  men  :  comp.  Isa.  xxix.  16.  s.  xl.  11 — 16, 
25—31.  xli.  1—4,  22—28.  xlii.  6—9.  xhii.  6—8.  xliv.  6—9,  22.  s. 
xlviii.  1 — 8,  12 — 16.  These  prophecies  and  miracles  were  in  that 
age  the  principal  ground  on  which  the  knowledge  of  one  omnis- 
cient and  omnipotent  God,  the  Creator  and  Governor  of  all  things, 
was  established,  and  from  them  was  derived  the  strength  of  all  the 
other  arguments  by  which  the  truth  of  the  unity  of  God  was  sup- 
ported, and  the  vanity  of  the  false  gods  made  evident. The  im- 
mediate object  of  some  prophecies  may  be  different  from  that  just 
Stated,  but  it  is  easy  to  observe  that  it  is  their  ultimate  end. 

As  it  has  been  frequently  asserted  in  the  present  age,  that  prophecies 
and  miracles  have  not  attained  their  object,  it  may  be  permitted  to  in- 
quire whether  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God  has  not  been  preserved, 
or  whether  it  has  been  preserved  by  any  other  means  than  these,  or  of 
what  other  object  the  assertion  is  to  be  understood.  Perhaps  they  wko 
make  it,  refer  merely  to  the  fact,  that  miracles  and  prophecies  have  not 
sufficed  to  bring  the  whole  body  of  mankind  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
true  God.  But  such  a  result  would  require  a  total  change  of  the  nature 
and  constitution  of  man,  who  neither  can  nor  ought  to  be  compelled  to 
any  course  of  conduct,  which,  in  order  to  have  any  moral  worth,  ought 
to  be  the  result  of  free  and  spontaneous  choice.  To  give  this  objection 
force  it  ought  to  be  shown  that  the  object  of  prophecies  and  miracles 
veally  was  at  once  to  bring  all  men  to  the  knowledge  of  the  true  God. 
This,  in  tlie  present  condition  of  men,  governed,  as  they  are,  by  such 
great  and  various  prejudices,  influenced  by  so  many  attachments,  and 
continually  liable  to  be  led  astray  by  fickleness,  precipitancy,  or  levity, 
pould  not  be  eflected  without  compulsion,  nor,  consequently,  without  a 
change  of  the  human  nature  and  constitution. 

§  77.     (iii)     The  Prophecies  relate  to  remote  events. 

The  oracles  and  the  predictions  of  sagacious  men,  either  relate^ 
only  to  proximate  events,  the  causes  of  which  had  already  begun  to 
exert  their  efficacy,  and  thus  afforded  to  the  attentive  observer  indi- 
cations of  the  effects  which  would  be  produced  ;  or,  they  were  formed 
upon  principles  drawn  from  the  analogy  of  history  and  the  condition  of 
iM,n,  by  means  of  which  the  authors  of  the  predictions  concluded  that 


6i?    THE    OLD    TES'fAMENT.  299 

ii'om  the  same  circumstances  the  same  results  would  follow  which 
had  already  been  produced.  Thus  Poiybius,  Hist.  L.  vi.  §  7.,  having 
observed  that  all  democracies  and  aristocracies  finally  became  mo- 
narchies, predicted  that  this  would  be  the  fate  of  the  Roman  govern- 
ment, which  actually  came  to  pass  almost  a  century  after  his  time. 

But  in  the  prophecies  of  the  Bible  the  case  is  different.  Very  remote 
events  were  predicted  in  an  age  when  the  causes  to  which  they  owed 
their  origin  either  did  not  exist,  or  were  so  obscure  and  latent,  as  to  be 
concealed  from  the  observation  of  the  most  perspicacious  of  mortals, 
especially  as  the  predictions  were  not,  like  those  of  the  heathen  oracles, 
merely  general  in  their  character,  but  are  strongly  marked  by  the  addi- 
tion of  many  circumstances  of  the  events  which  they  foretold.  Nor 
could  the  analogy  of  history  enable  men*  to  make  conjectures  like  the 
predictions  which  foretold  not  only  the  exile  of  the  Hebrews,  but  also 
their  return  to  their  country,  and  their  subsequent  prosperity  ;  Deut. 
xxviii.  36,  49.,  xxx.  1—10.,  Amos  ix.  4,  14.,  Hos.  ii.  15—23.,  xiv. 
5—9.,  Mic.  iv.  1—8.,  vii.  10—17.,  Tsa.  xi.  11—16.;  the  burning 
and  devastation  of  Jerusalem,  Amos  ii.  6.,  Hos.  viii.  14.,  Mic.  iii.  12., 
vii.  13.;  the  empire  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  the  seventy  years  captivity 
in  Babylonia,  Mic.  iv.  10.  s.,  7,  8—13.,  Isa.  vi.  1 1—13.,  Jer.  xxv.  11. 
s.,  xxix.  10.;  the  wars  of  the  Maccabees,  and  the  constancy  of  the 
Israelites  in  the  worship  of  the  true  God  after  the  captivity,  Hos.  ii. 
15—23.,  xiv.  5—9.,  Mic.  iv.  1—13.  vii.  11,  14—20.,  Jer.  xxxi. 
1 — 9.  31 — 37.,  Zech.  ix.  11 — x.  12.  Since  predictions  of  this  de- 
scription could  not  be  made  by  men  of  the  greatest  sagacity,  and 
must  necessarily  have  proceeded  from  Gob  himself,  we  are  warranted 
in  concluding  that  others  agreeing  with  these  in  nature  and  design, 
and  attributed  to  the  same  God,  have  in  like  manner,  the  Deity  for 
their  author.  Yet,  if  the  prophets  were  competent  to  discern  some 
future  events  by  the  mere  force  of  their  natural  abihties,  and  sacli 
predictions  afterwards  received  a  sanction  ai-ising  out  of  their  divine 
mission,  this  would  aiford  no  ground  for  asserting,  that  they  were  in- 
debted for  all  their  predictions  to  their  own  sagacity,  and  were  solely 
on  that  account  esteemed  as  agents  of  the  divinity  by  an  ignorant 
multitude.  Tliis  assertion,  which  has  been  advanced  by  some  learned 
men,  is  inconsistent  with  itself:  for,  according  to  it,  the  prophets 
must  have  been  more  sagacious  than  the  wisest  men  of  the  most  cul- 
tivated nations,  none  of  whorti  have  ever  be«n  able  to  utter  such  pre- 


300    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

dictions  as  theirs,  or  to  invent  such  a  doctrine  concerning  God  as  tliev 
teach  ;  and  yet  the  people  among  whom  these  men,  so  superior  to  all 
others  in  sagacity  and  wisdom,  hved,  must  have  been  so  ignorant  and 
stupid  as  not  to  observe  that  all  these  predictions  resulted  from  mere 
natural  knowledge.  The  nation  to  whom  such  men  belonged  could 
never  have  been  so  ignoi-ant ;  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  could  men, 
endowed  with  such  sagacity  and  wisdom  and  such  a  pure  knowledge 
of  rehgion  as  have  never  been  discovered  in  the  most  cultivated  peo- 
ple of  antiquity,  have  arisen  in  a  nation  so  dull  and  stupid.[a] 

[a)  If,  in  order  to  find  a  parallel  with  scripture  prophecies,  any  one 
should  appeal  to  the  story  of  Croesus,  who  is  said  by  Herodotus  (I,  47.) 
to  have  received  responses  from  the  oracles  of  Greece  and  Libya  which 
declared  what  he  had  been  doing  on  a  certain  day ;  it  may  well  be  asked, 
who  will  vouch  for  the  truth  of  this  account  which  Herodotus  must  have 
obtained  from  rumour,  150  years  after  the  time  of  Croesus,  after  it  had 
passed  through  four  or  five  generations?  The  scripture  prophecies  were 
committed  to  writing  by  the  prophets  themselves  and  preserved  in  pub- 
lic documents :  and  many  of  them  refer  to  a  very  distant  period.] 

§  78.     (iv)     The  Prophecies  are  not  ambiguous. 

The  heathen  oracles  were,  as  has  already  been  proved  from  Cicero, 
so  ambiguous,  that,  whatever  the  event  might  be,  they  could  not  be 
charged  with  falsehood.  Such  is  that  well  known  response  :  "  Ibis 
redibis  non  morieris  in  bello  ;"  which  gives  opposite  senses  according 
to  the  punctuation,  either  thus  :  "  ibis,  redibis,  non  morieris  in  bello  ;'" 
or  thus  :  "ibis  ;  redibis  ?  non,  morieris  in  bello  :"  also  that  announ- 
ced to  Croesus  :  '  that  if  he  waged  war,  he  should  overturn  a  vast 
empire  ;'  and  another,  '  that  Crcesus  need  not  fear  until  a  mule  should 
occupy  the  Persian  throne.' But  the  biblical  prophecies  are  defi- 
nite predictions.  This  is  observable  in  all,  but  especially  in  those 
which  relate  to  proximate  events,  and  for  which,  were  it  not  for  this 
characteristic,  the  prophets  might  seem  to  be  indebted  to  their  own 
acuteness.  For  as  the  oracles  and  soothsayers  found  it  necessary  to 
involve  their  predictions  of  proximate  events  in  ambiguous  construc- 
tions, that  in  any  result  their  authority  might  be  preserved  ;  so  our 
prophets,  if  they  had  only  depended  upon  natural  sagacity,  would 
have  been  still  less  capable  of  speaking  so  definitely  and  with  such 
confidence,  since  they  must  have  known  that  a  capital  punishment 
would  bo  tlie  consequence  of  a  failure  of  their  predictions  uttered  in 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  301 

lJi6  name  of  Jehovah  ;  Deut.  xviii.  20.  ss. Our  prophets  who,  with 

the  prospect  of  capital  punishment  if  their  predictions  failed,  spoke 
so  clearly  concerning  future  events  and  had  their  predictions  verified 
by  a  complete  accomplishment,  cannot  possibly  be  confounded  with 
the  discerning  men  who  uttered  oracles  in  the  names  of  the  heathen 
gods,  were  in  no  danger  whatever  might  be  the  event  of  their  predic- 
tions, and  although  they  exercised  their  sagacity  in  sedulously  obser- 
ving all  the  circumstances  of  the  times>  proposed  their  conjectures  in 
a  form  capable  of  accommodation  to  any  possible  result,  and  notwith- 
standing were  frequently  deceived.  The  comparison  clearly  shows 
that  the  former  must  have  been,  as  they  themselves  asserted,  taught 

by  God. The  false  prophets  among  the  Hebrews,  it  is  true,  were 

not  deterred  from  uttering  their  predictions  by  the  fear  of  incurring 
the  punishment  of  death  ;  but  they  were  the  tools  of  the  nobles  and 
princes,  under  whose  protection  they  would  promise  themselves  impu- 
nity, whatever  might  happen.  But  if,  like  them,  our  prophets  had  in- 
tended merely  to  predict  what  their  own  sagacity  would  enable  them 
to  divine,  what  occasion  was  there,  while  the  event  was  so  uncertain, 
to  set  themselves  in  opposition  to  the  false  prophets  in  so  marked  a 
manner  and  with  the  claim  of  divine  authority,  when  this  was  accom- 
panied by  so  great  a  risk  ?  They  might  have  avoided  all  danger,  sim- 
ply by  proposing  what  they  announced  as  their  own  conjectures,  and 
by  drawing  from  existing  circumstances  such  arguments  as  would  be 
sufficient  to  influence  their  hearers  and  readers. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  the  Hebrews  frequently  referred  the  events  of 
divine  providence  immediately  to  God  :  and  it  appears  from  I  Sam.  xxiv. 
o,  11.,  II  Sam.  xvi.  10.  s.  xxiv.  1.,  comp.  I  Chron.  xxi.  1.  xsviii.  6.,  that 
they  also  occasionally  used  the  expression,  "  the  Lord  said,"  when  GoD 
had  not  spoken ;  and  therefore,  this  expression  is  not  always  to  be  un- 
derstood in  its  strictest  sense,  but  sometimes  merely  imports,  that  divine 
providence  had  so  disposed  events,  that  the  occasion  of  doing  some  parti- 
cular action  was  as  suitable,  and  the  power  of  performance  as  complete, 
as  if  God  himself  had  said,  "do  this."  This  however,  wiU  not  authorize 
the  conclusion,  that  the  phrase,  "the  Lord  said,"  has  always  and  in 
every  place  the  same  limited  signification  ;  for  there  are  so  many  predic- 
tions of  events  which  the  most  sagacious  men  among  the  ancients  neither 
did  nor  could  foresee,  that  divine  assistance  must  have  been  re.^lly  neces- 
sary for  their  utterance.  It  is  from  the  context  and  subject  therefore 
that  we  must  determine  when  the  expression, "  the  Lord  said,"  is  to  be 
understood  strictly,  and  when  it  relates  merely  to  the  ordinary  provid^n.ce 


302  P'ARi'ICtrLAR  INfROBUCTIOlSr  TO  EACH  BOOK^ 

©f  God.*  An  examination  of  all  the  passages  in  "which  the  phrase  oc*- 
cars,  has  led  me  to  form  the  opinion,  that  the  prophets  who  had  received 
divine  commands,  might  apply  it  even  to  those  things  which  they  derived 
from  their  own  unassisted  reason  ;[a]  for  being  furnished  with  a  divine 
commission,  they  were  able,  and  in  my  judgment,  obliged,  in  the  due  dis- 
cbarge of  their  office,  to  propose  even  their  own  remarks,  under  the  sanc- 
tion of  their  character  as  ambassadors  of  God.  But  although  the  expres- 
sion, "  the  Lord  said,"  was  used  even  of  the  ordinary  course  of  events, 
yet  the  distinction  between  this  natural  order  and  one  supernatural,  was 

perfectly  known,  as  appears  very  clearly  from  II  Sam.  xvi.  23. After 

all,  since  the  mind  of  the  prophet  is  not  open  to  our  inspection,  it  is  im- 
possible every  where  accurately  to  distinguish  what  the  prophets  drew 
from  their  own  resources,  from  what  they  owed  to  revelation  ;  and  even 
if  this  distinction  could  always  be  made,  it  would  be  of  no  benefit  to  us, 
since  even  those  things  which  the  prophets  uttered  from  their  own  re- 
sources, the  suggestions  of  their  own  minds,  partake,  by  virtue  of  their 
divine  mission  and  of  that  assistance  which  we  call  inspiration,  of  the 
same  certainty  with  those  which  were  revealed. 

[a)  See,  however,  Jer.  xxiii.  16,  21,  25,  and  compare  what  is  s&id 
on  this  subject  in  the  Biblical  Theology  of  Storr  and  Flatt,  (tr. 
Schmucker)  §  13.  lU.  10.  Vol.  I.  p.  235.     Tr.] 

§  79.     The  Prophecies  of  Scripture  not  general. 

The  presages  of  sagacious  men,  formed  from  their  observations  of 
tbe  course  of  things  and  of  powerfully  operating  causes,  are  merelj' 
general,  without  any  attempt  to  define  the  time  and  circumstances  of 
the  event  foretold  ;  just  as  Polybius  foresaw  the  change  of  the  Roman 
republic  to  a  monarchy,  without  any  foreknowledge  of  the  time  or 
manner  of  the  change.  And,  again,  a  prediction  which  is  fortuitously 
accomplished,  can  be  nothing  more  tlian  general,  and  it  is  only  occa- 
sionally that  it  has  a  corresponding  event,  and  this  most  commonly- 
but  partially  accordant  with  the  prediction.  So  the  prophecy  of  the 
archbishop  Malachi,[a]  that  there  shovdd  arise  an  apostolical  pilgrim, 
although  only  general,  was  yet  but  partially  fulfilled  in  the  case  of 
Pius  VI.,  who,  though  a  pilgrim,  was  not  rendered  such  by  apostolical 
labours,  but  by  adverse  pohtical  circumstances.  These  limits  to  the 
accomplishment  of  human  predictions  were  well  known  to  the  framcrs 
of  the  oracles,  and  to  the  soothsayei-s,  of  the  heathen  ;  for  which  rea- 
son they  were  careful  to  utter  their  presages,  in  other  respects  ambi- 
guous, in  a  few  general  terms,  and  without  any  specification  of  cir- 

[*  Sfte  Germ.  LnfWd.  pp.  Siv*,  355.     Tr.] 


OV    THE    OLD    TtlSTAlViBNT.  '303 

ciimstances. ■Among  the  prophecies  of  Scripture,  on  the  contrary, 

there  are  scarcely  any  so  completely  general  as  not  to  add  at  least 
some  circumstances,  and  many  even  name  the  time  and  place  of  their 
fulfilment.  The  number  of  circumstances  predicted,  moreover,  ap- 
pears surprisingly  great,  when  we  compare  together  the  various  pro- 
phecies relating  to  a  single  event  Thus,  with  the  promises  made  to 
the  ancestors  of  the  Hebrews,  it  is  clearly  announced,  that  the  bless- 
ing which  all  nations  were  to  enjoy,  should  come,  not  through  Ish- 
mael's  posterity  or  Esau's,  but  through  that  of  Isaac  and  Jacobs  who 
should  sojourn  in  a  foreign  land  400  years,  from  which,  after  much 
oppression,  they  should  be  defivered  and  brought  to  Canaan,  and 
their  oppressors  be  punished.  Se^Gen.  xii.  2.  s.  xv.  4.  s.  xvii.  4 — 
8,  19.  ss.  xxii.  16.  ss.  xxvi.  3.  ss.  xxviii.  13,  15.  and  comp.  Gen. 
XV.  13 — 16.,  with  Exod.  xii.  40. When  Moses  predicts  the  mira- 
culous plagues  which  were  to  be  sent  upon  the  Egyptians,  he  fre- 
quently defines  the  time  of  their  commencement  and  of  their  termi- 
nation ;  declares  that  the  Hebrews  should  be  exempt  from  the  inflic- 
tion, and  adds  many  other  particulars.  See  Ex.  viii.  5 — 10,  17 — 28, 
ix.  2—8,  9—11,  18—29.  x.  4,  13—19,  21—23.  xi.  4—8.  xii.  6,  12. 

s.  29.  s.  xiii.  18 — xiv.  31. If  some  of  his  promises  and  threats  are 

expressed  in  general  terms,  yet  in  others  he  specifies  particular  cir- 
cumstances, not  to  transpire  until  a  thousand  years  and  upwards  after 
his  time.  Comp.  Deut.  xxviii.  36,  63 — 68.  xxix.  21 — 27.  xxx.  1 — 6. 
But  the  subject  does  not  depend  for  illustration  upon  the  most  an- 
cient prophecies.  There  are  others  of  a  more  modern  date  which 
are  no  less  particular.  Isaiah  predicts  to  Ahaz  deliverance  from  Pe^ 
kah  and  Rezin,  the  depopulation  of  the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Da- 
mascus, and  the  devastation  of  Judea  within  a  definite  time  ;  he  of- 
fers to  give  a  miraculous  attestation  of  the  truth  of  his  predictions  ; 
he  announces  also  the  oppressions  to  which  the  country  would  be 

subjected  by  the  Assyrians  and  Egyptians. He  declares  to  Heze* 

kiah,  at  a  time  when  everything  seemed  on  the  point  of  being  ruined, 
that  Sennacherib  would  be  obliged  to  retire  ;  he  mentions  the  wind 
which  would  destroy  his  army,  the  rumour  which  he  would  hear,  viz. 
that  the  king  of  Cush  was  marching  against  him,  and  adds,  that  he 

should  not  besiege  Jerusalem. When  Hezekiah  was  sick  without 

any  hope  of  recovery,  he  promises  him  an  addition  of  fifteen  years 


304         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

to  his  life,  and  confirms  hia  promise  by  a  miracle. lie  foretells 

the  carrying  away  of  the  royal  treasures  and  family  to  Babylon,  more 
than  100  years  before  the  event  took  place-  and  while  the  Chaldeans 
were  a  people  without  much  celebrity.     See  Isa.  vii.  4 — 25.  viii.  1 — ' 
X.  34.  xxxvii.  xxxviii.  4 — 8.  xxxix.  5 — 8. 

Micah  describes  the  subjection  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  and  the 
complete  destruction  of  Samaria ;  he  foretells  the  captivity  of  the 
Jews  and  the  devastation  of  their  city  and  temple,  their  return  and 
subsequent  happiness,  the  victories  of  the  Maccabees,  the  perseve- 
rance of  the  Jews  in  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  and  tlie  extension 
of  rehgious  knowledge  See  Micali*l.  iii.  12.  iv.  9 — 11.  vii.  10 — 14. 
also  iv.  1 — 7.  12 — 14. 

Jeremiah  foretells  the  return  of  the  Egyptian  army  into  their  own 

country  without  venturing  a  battle. He  predicts,  not  merely  the 

capture  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Chaldeans,  but  its  conflagration  ;  that 
Zedekiah  should  be  brought  to  Nebuchadnezzar  and  taken  to  Baby- 
lon, but  should  not  die  a  violent  death  ;  and  further,  that  the  Jews 
should  return  from  their  captivity  after  it  had  lasted  70  years.  See 
Jerem.  xxxvii.  7,  17.  xxxiv.  1 — 7.  xxxviii.  1 — 24.  xxv.  11.  s. 
xxix.  10.  1.  li. 

The  same  particularity  appears  in  the  prophecies  of  Ezekiel,  xxxvi. 
xxxvii.,  of  Zechariah,  vi.  9 — 16.  ix.  1 — 8,  11 — 17.  xi.  xii.  1 — 3,  and 
of  Malachi.  The  last  predicts,  with  circumstances  of  extraordinary 
minuteness,  the  advent  of  the  long  promised  descendant  of  David, 
who  would  punish,  not  the  heathen,  as  the  Jews  erroneously  suppo- 
sed, but  themselves,  and  particularly  the  Levites,  who  were  chiefly 
distressed  by  the  destruction  of  the  temple.  He  announces  the  pre- 
vious advent  of  a  zealous  messenger,  a  prophet  like  Elias,  who  should 
make  the  last  efibrt  to  improve  the  moral  character  of  the  Jews  ;  that 
aflerwards  the  land  should  be  smitten  with  the  irrevocable  curse,  the 
ckerem,  in  the  execution  of  which  the  true  worshippers  of  God  should 
be  spared.  Is  it  possible  for  prophecy  to  be  more  circumstantial  in  rela- 
tion to  John  the  Baptist,  to  Jesus,  to  the  final  devastation  of  the  country, 
and  to  the  destruction  oF  Jerusalem  by  Titus  ?  See  Mai.  ii.  17 — iii.  24. 
(ii.  17 — iv.  6.)  If  we  add  to  this  what  Zechariah  (ix.  9.),  Daniel  (Lx. 
25 — 27.),  Ezekiel  (xxxiv.  23,  24.  xxxvii.  24.),  Jeremiah  (xxiii.  xxx. 
e — 10),  Isaiah  (xi.  xlix— Ixvi.),  Micah  (v.  1 — 3.),  Amos  (ix.  11, 12.). 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  305 

and  Nathan  (in  II  Sam.  vii.  I  Chron.  xvii.  comp.  Psal.  IxxxLx.  and  ex.) 
have  predicted  respecting  the  great  descendant  of  David,  we  shall 
find  many  very  circumstantial  prophecies  which  have  been  completely 
verified. 

[a)  Malachi,  or  Malmedouk  O'Murgan,  canonized  by  the  Romifh 
Church,  was  Archbishop  of  Armagh  in  1134;  appointed  Pope's  Legate  in 
1137;  and  died  at  Rome  in  1148.  See  Fleury  Hist.  Eccles.  XIV. 
534.  ss.  "  Prophetia  de  futuris  Pontificibus  Romanis  cum  expositione 
Ciacconii  extat  apud  Arnoldum  Wion,  in  Ligno  Vitas,  L.  II.  c.  xl." 
Cave,  Hist.  Lit.  p.  663.  ed.  Land. J683.     Tr.] 

§  80.     Tlie  Prophecies  are  clear. 

Although  the  prophecies  of  scripture  are  not  in  every  respect  clear, 
yet  their  obscurity  is  by  no  means  so  great  as  that  which  meets  us  in 
the  heathen  oracles,  where  it  was  studiously  aimed  at,  lest  a  clear 
prediction  should  be  frustrated  by  the  want  of  a  corresponding  result. 
It  is  acknowledged  that  the  obscurity  of  prophecies  is  very  considera- 
ble before  the  darkness  is  dispelled  by  the  event ;  whence  it  happens 
that  occasionally  even  the  prophets  confess  that  their  predictions  are 
not  plain  to  themselves,  or,  which  is  equivalent,  refer  to  some  future 
period  when  their  predictions  shall  be  illustrated  by  history.  See 
Isa.  vi,  9 — 13.  xxix.  1 1 — 18.  Jer.  xxiii.  20,  28.  xxx.  24.  Ezek.  xxxiii. 
33.  Dan.  vii.  28.  viii.  27.  xii.  8.  s.  Zech.  ii.  13.  (9.),  15.  (11.),  iv.  ^vi. 
15.  There  is  nevertheless  a  degree  of  perspicuity  pervading  all  the 
prophecies  sufficient  to  enable  us  to  discern  the  event  which  they  unfold 
in  history,  if  it  has  been  transmitted  to  us  complete,  and  to  acknow- 
ledge that  he  who  sent  the  prophets  must  have  been  the  omniscient 
ruler  of  the  universe.  Some  are  perfectly  clear,  as  the  predictions 
contained  in  Ex.  vii — xiv  ;  also,  the  prophecies  concerning  the  over- 
throw of  the  kingdoms  of  Israel  and  Judah,  the  destruction  of  Samaria 
and  Jerusalem,  the  captivity  and  return  of  Israel  and  Judah,  the  re- 
conciliation of  the  ten  tribes  with  the  tribe  of  Judah  after  the  return 
from  captivity,  the  pacific  period  subsequent  to  the  captivity,  the  vie 
tories  of  the  Maccabees,  the  promised  illustrious  son  of  David,  and 
especially  those  concerning  the  propagation  of  the  true  religion  to 
other  nations.  Not  less  clear  are  many  of  the  symbolical  prophecies, 
such  as  Ezek.  iv.  1— v.  4.  xii.  1—20.   I  Ki,  xi.  30-  Hos.  i.  2—1!. 

39 


306         PAKTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

If  some  prophecies  are  rather  obscure,  the  cause  is  partly  the  want  ot' 
historical  records,  partly  the  imperfect  knowledge  which  we  have  of 
the  Hebrew  language,  which  has  led  interpreters  into  a  variety  of 

opinions. To  demand  as  great  a  degree  of  clearness  as  that  which 

history  requires,  is  unreasonable.  A  prophecy  of  this  sort  would 
sometimes  be  subjected  to  an  impossibility  of  fulfilment ;  as,  for  ex- 
ample, if  the  prediction  involved  a  calamity  or  something  exceedingly 
oftensive,  which  the  nation,  to  whom  the  prophecy  is  announced,  was 
^o  bring  upon  itself  by  some  particular  act.  If  such  a  prophecy  were 
to  define  with  historical  accuracy  the  place,  the  time,  the  persons, 
and  the  manner  of  performance,  without  doubt  all  the  persons  by 
whose  agency  its  accomplishment  was  to  be  effected,  would  carefully 
avoid  doing  any  thing  to  give  occasion  to  promote  it,  and  thus  the 
prediction  would  be  without  a  corresponding  event,  and  consequently 
false,  which  cannot  be  the  case  with  any  thing  coming  from  God. 
This  may  be  exemplified  by  the  instances  of  Jesus  and  John  the 
Baptist,  who  would  not  have  been  put  to  death,  if  the  prophecies 
concerning  them  had  been  delivered  with  historical  perspicuity. 
Those  which  relate  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem   by  Titus  may 

serve  as  another  example. But  although  the  scriptural  prophecies 

do  not  represent  the  subjects  to  which  they  relate  with  the  precision 
of  history,  it  is  not  true  that  they  afforded  no  previous  knowledge  of 
the  events  :  for  as  an  artist's  rough  sketches  of  some  intended  painting 
exhibit  many  lines  from  which  when  the  work  is  finished  it  is  easy  to 
perceive  that  the  sketch  is  a  delineation  of  the  picture  ;  so  also  the 
prophecies,  although  they  are  not  clear,  yet  they  contain  indications 
of  the  future  events  which  they  have  in  view,  sufficient  to  enable  us 
after  their  accomphshment,  to  ascertain  by  the  aid  of  history  that  they 

actually  predicted  these  events. Those  interpreters  who  have  not 

noticed  this  characteristic  of  the  prophecies  have  frequently  involved 
them  in  additional  obscurity,  by  adopting  principles  which  were  not 
derived  from  the  nature  and  conformation  of  those  productions,  but 
taken  up  at  random.  Some  have  looked  for  perfect  clearness,  and 
consequently  have  wrested  to  a  meaning  of  their  own  many  passages. 
and  even  some  that  were  merely  intended  to  fill  up  the  picture. 
Others  have  imagined  tliat  they  could  every  where  discern  Christ 
and  the  Christian  rhvn-h.     Others  have  contended  that  the  prophe- 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTA.'MEM'.  Ml 

cies  were  merely  general  promises  and  threats,  and  thus  have  obscured 
events  clearly  predicted.  Others  have  expected  that  the  events  pre- 
dicted in  the  prophecies  should  be  foretold  in  chronological  order,  and 
to  make  this  evident,  have  perverted  many  passages  by  forced  inter- 
pretations. Almost  all  have  been  unwilling  to  acknowledge,  that 
the  mind  of  the  prophets  was  dwelling  on  a  different  object  from  that 
which  the  Deity  through  their  words  intended  to  express,  and  that 

therefore  there  is  really  in  some  passages  a  double  sense. Of 

these  two  last  points  it  will  be  necessary  to  speak  somewhat  morp 
particularly. 

§81.     Of  the  prophetic  perspective  vision. 

They  are  certainly  in  an  error  who  suppose  that  tlie  prophets  saw 
future  events  in  historical  order  and  clearness  ;  for  evidence  may  be 
derived  from  the  prophecies  themselves  to  prove  that  they  beheld  only 
some  things,  and  those  not  at  all  as  we  are  accustomed  to  view  objects 
near  at  hand,  but  as  we  see  things  at  a  distance.  Hence  the  prophets 
are  often  compared  to  the  watchmen  who  were  formerly  stationed 
on  towers,  and  thence  beheld  and  announced  events  which  w-ere  oc- 
curring at  a  distance.  II  Sam.  xiii.  34.  xviii.  24 — 27.  II  Ki.  ix. 
17 — 19.  In  like  manner  the  prophets,  raised,  as  it  were,  upon  an 
elevated  station,  looked  forward  to  what  should  come  to  pass  in  future 
times,  and  were  commanded  to  announce  what  they  beheld  to  others  ; 
Isa.  lii.  8.  xxi.  6 — 12.  Jer.  vi.  17.  Mic.  vii.  4.  Ezek.  iii.  17.  xxxiii. 
1 — 9.  Rev.  iv.  1.  xxi.  10.  Forthis  reason  a  prophet  is  called  a  seer, 
n?n,  riK*"!,  and  his  prophecy,  a  sight  or  a  vision,  pin,  nN"io.[a]  The 

prophecies  therefore  resemble  pictures  which  represent  extensive 
prospects,  comprising  many  objects  at  various  intervals  of  distance  ; 
and  as  in  these  all  the  objects  are  not  depicted  with  equal  clearness, 
but,  while  the  outline  of  the  foreground  is  distinct  and  its  colouring 
vivid,  the  distance  is  less  perfectly  defined,  and  the  extreme  back 
ground  is  clothed  with  a  shadowy  mist ;  so  the  prophecies  exhibit  as 
it  were  in  a  painting  a  delineation  of  various  future  objects  or  events, 
the  nearest  of  which  are  the  most  perfectly  described,  while  the  more 
remote  are  shown  in  proportion  to  their  distance  in  a  weaker  light 
and  with  a  fainter  otitline  :  the  intervals  of  time  are  not  distinctly  no- 


.'508  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACJh    BOOK 

ted,  but  all  the  objects  are  simultaneously  represented,  as  they  lay  in 
prospect  before  the  prophet  and  therefore  not  in  historical  or  chronolo- 
gical order,  but  as  they  casually  occur  to  the  sight  of  the  beholder, 
some  objects,  by  their  importance,  first  attracting  his  attention,  and 
afterwards  recalling  it  at  frequent  intervals,  while  others  less  promi- 
nent, receive  but  a  transient  notice.  Comp.  Gen.  xv.  II  Sam.  vii. 
I  Chron.  xvii,  Ps.  Ixxxix.  2 — 38.  Hence  it  appears  that  in  the  pro- 
phecies it  was  scarcely  possible,  before  the  accomphshment,  to  distin- 
guish which  of  the  events  predicted  was  near  at  hand,  and  which  more 
.remote.  The  prophets  frequently  interweave  descriptions  of  remote 
events,  with  others  of  objects  near  at  hand.  Thus  Zechariah,  c.  ix. 
in  V.  I — 8,  speaks  of  Alexander,  in  v.  9.  s.,  of  the  Messiah,  whom  he 
beholds  afar  off,  in  r.  11.  ss.  of  the  Maccabees,  and  in  c.  xi.  again  of 
the  Messiah.  Comp.  Isa.  xi.  Mic.  i.  2 — v.  14.  Ezek.  xxxvii. 
15—28. 

It  is  further  worthy  of  observation,  that  the  prophecies  have  this 
peculiarity,  that  the  circumstance  which  constitutes  the  foreground  is 
sometimes  an  image  of  the  much  more  important  circumstance  which 
constitutes  the  distance,  the  former  possessing  a  surprising  resem- 
blance to  the  latter.  In  this  respect  the  comparison  drawn  from  the 
perspective  in  painting  does  not  hold  good. 

[a)  Leighton,  Select  Works,  I.  43,  gives  the  following  beautiful 
illustration  of  Isa.  Ix.  1.:  "  The  prophet,  elevated  by  the  spirit  of  God 
to  a  view  of  after  ages,  as  clear  as  if  present,  seems  here  to  find  his  people 
sitting  under  a  dark  mantle  of  a  sad  and  tedious  night,  and  having  long 
expected  the  sun's  return  in  vain,  before  its  time,  they  give  over  expec- 
tation when  it  is  near  them,  and  desperately  fold  themselves  to  lie  per- 
petually in  the  dark.  Now  the  prophet,  as  it  were  standing  awake  upon 
some  mountain,  perceives  the  day  approaching,  and  the  golden  chariots  of 
the  morning  of  deliverance  hasting  forward,  and  seems  to  come  speedily 
with  these  glad  news  to  a  captive  people,  and  sounds  this  trumpet  in  their 
ears,  arise,  shine,  for  thy  light  is  come,  and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  is  risen 
vpon  thee." 

A  remarkable  instance  of  this  prophetic  vision,  seen,  as  from  a  watch- 
tower,  in  an  extended  plain,  may  be  found  in  Isa.  Ixiii.  1 — 6.  See  Vel- 
THFESEN  de  optica  rerum  futurarum  descriptione,  ad  illustrandum 
locum  les.  Ixiii.  1 — 6.,  in  Comm.  Theol.  a  Velthtteseit,  Kpinoet,,  et 
RrpKRTi,  Vol.  VI.  pp.  75—117.     Tr.l 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  309 

§  82.     Some  propJiecies  have  a  double  sense.[a^ 

The  older  interpreters,  who  drew  their  rules  of  interpretation  from 
the  style  of  the  prophets,  acknowledged  the  existence  of  two  literal 
senses  in  some  prophetic  passages.  When  however  this  principle  was 
too  broadly  applied  by  wild  and  irregular  expositors  it  became  sus- 
pected, and  has  at  length  been  almost  entirely  exploded,  on  the  ground 
that  in  no  passage  more  than  a  single  meaning  can  be  given  to  each 
word,  and  consequently  no  more  than  a  single  sense  to  the  whole 
passage.  But  this  reasoning  does  not  prove  that  God  could  not,  by 
his  especial  interference,  so  modify  the  language  of  the  prophet,  that 
it  should  convey  beside  the  sense  which  the  prophet  himself  might 
have  in  his  mind,  another  sense  still  more  exalted.  Thus  the  decla- 
ration  of  the  high  priest  :  "  it  is  expedient  for  us  that  one  man  should 
die  for  the  people,  and  that  the  whole  nation  perish  not ;"  is  explained 
by  John  (xi.  50,  51.)  in  a  twofold  sense.  For  although  the  high 
priest  merely  intended  to  say  that  true  policy  required  the  execution 
of  an  individual  in  order  to  preserve  the  state,  yet  the  evangeUst  de- 
clares, that  by  those  words  God  designed  to  express  another  truth, 
namely,  that  Jesus  was  to  die  for  the  sins  of  men.  That  the  case  of  the 
prophets  was  similar  we  learn  from  themselves,  when  they  confess  that 
they  do  not  understand  their  own  predictions  :  for  in  such  circum- 
stances either  they  must  have  attached  to  their  words  a  sense 
different  from  that  designed  by  the  Deity  ;  or  they  must  have  in- 
tended to  convey  by  them  some  general  and  indefinite  idea,  when  in 
the  divine  purpose  they  had  a  particular  and  definite  signification.  In 
either  case,  the  existence  of  a  double  sense  must  necessarily  be  al- 
lowed, viz.  the  subjective,  or  that  which  appears  to  the  speaker  to  be 
the  meaning  of  the  words  uttered  by  him  at  the  instigation  of  the  Holy 
Spirit ;  and  the  objective  or  that  which  is  really  intended  by  the 
Deity  himself.  Comp.  Seilers  Biblische  Hermeneutik,  1800,  §  195 
— 199.  S.  225 — 233.  That  a  similar  double  sense  does  exist  in  other 
places  where  there  is  no  confession  of  the  prophets  that  their  predic- 
tions are  not  understi^Dd  by  themselves,  will  be  readily  granted,  if  we 
consider  that  many  prophecies  must,  before  their  accomplishment, 
have  been  equally  obscure  with  those  the  obscurity  of  which  is  thus 
acknowledged.     So  when  Isaiah  predicted  to  Hezekiah  that  his  royal 


310    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

treasures  should  be  carried  to  Babylon,  and  that  the  regal  postenlj 
should  be  eunuchs  in  the  Babylonish  court  (Isa.  xxxix.),  it  is  plain 
that  he  understood  it  as  referring  to  the  Assyrian  monarchy,  although 
itff  seat  was  then  at  Nineveh  ;  but  God  by  this  pfrophecy  designated, 
Aot  the  captivity  of  Manasseh  among  the  Assyrians  mentioned  II  Chr. 
xxxiii.  11.,  but  the  subjection  to  the  Chaldeans,  and  the  Babylonian 
captivity. — -^\gain.  when  Micah  predicted  the  ruin  and  prolonged 
desolation  of  Jerusalem  and  the  temple,  (c.  iii.  12.)  and  the  transpor- 
tation of  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  to  Babylonia  (c.  iv.  10),  he 
referred  the  fulfilment  of  his  prophecies  to  tbe  Assyrians,  and  was  so 
understood  by  the  Hebrews  (Jer.  xxvi.  18.  s.),  who  imagined  that 
his  predictions  had  failed  of  accomphshment  on  account  of  their  re- 
pentance and  reformation  ;  while  in  reality  the  Chaldeans  were  re- 
ferred to  by  the  Deity.  In  another  place  (c.  iv.  10 — 13),  when 
predicting  the  return  from  Babylon,  and  the  success  of  the  Hebrew 
arms,  Micah  either  must  have  been  totally  at  a  loss  to  conjecture 
when,  how,  and  by  whom  his  predictions  should  be  accomplished,  or 
he  must  have  conceived  of  some  other  accomplishment  than  that  in- 
tended by  the  Deity  and  displayed  by  the  event.  Comp.  also  Isa. 
liii — Ixvi.  Zech.  ix — xiv.  Perhaps  the  prophets  sometimes  under- 
stood an  expression  literally,  which  was  intended  to  receive  a  more  loose 
or  figurative  interpretation,  and  the  contrary.  So  Micah  (c.  v.  6.), 
prophesying  concerning  the  Maccabees,  would  probably  suppose  that 
the  enemies  of  the  Hebrews,  of  whom  he  was  then  speaking,  were  the 
Assyrians  properly  so  called  ;  whereas  they  were  Assyrians  only  in  a 
more  extended  use  of  the  word,  but  properly  speaking.   Syrians. 

The  doctrine,  already  advanced,  of  a  double  sense  in  some  of  the 
pirophecies,  is  still  further  confirmed  by  this  consideration,  that  in  all 
of  theni  God  intended  to  designate  certain  definite  circumstances, 
which  were  to  be  unfolded  in  the  interpretation,  although  they  may 
not  have  been  perceived  by  the  prophet  himself.  Thus,  when  the 
prophets  predicted  the  propagation  of  the  true  religion  among  other 
nations,  it  was  undoubtedly  the  will  of  the  Deity,  and  therefore  is 
the  objective  sense  of  the  prophecies,  that  this  propagation  should  take 
place  at  the  time,  and  in  the  manner,  in  which  it  did  actually  come  to 
pass,  and  by  the  instrumentality  of  the  very  men  who  did  really  bring 
it  about.     Nevertheless  the  prophets  thought  that  it  was  to  be  ar- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  311 

coinplished,  either  by  the  victories  of  the  Hebrews  inducing  idolaters 
to  acknowledge  their  God  who  gave  such  proofs  of  his  power,  to  be 
the  true  and  only  God  ;  or  by  that  method  of  conversion  which  the 
Maccabees  afterwards  attempted. 

From  the  preceding  observations  it  must  appear  evident  that  the 
rule  in  hermeneutics  which  excludes  the  apphcation  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament to  the  interpretation  of  the  Old,  is  not  to  be  strictly  followed. 
Otherwise  we  shall  shut  out  all  rays  of  light  from  a  place  already 
dark  ;  which  no  one  would  choose  to  do  whose  eyes  were  not  pur- 
blind or  weak. 

[a)  See  Horsley's  Sermons,  S.  XVIII.  p.  63.  ss.  Also  Alux's 
Reflections  on  the  Old  Testament,  c.  viii.  in  Watson's  Tracts,  I.  376. 
ed.  2d.,  and  Jortin's  Rem.  on  Ecc.  Hist.  1. 128.  ss.  ed.  Lond.  1805.  TV-] 

§  83.     The  Subject  (^  the  Prophecies. [a] 

The  writings  of  the  prophets  which  are  yet  extant,  are  by  no  means 
confined  to  prophecies.  They  contain  very  many  passages  which  re- 
late to  other  subjects,  such  as  the  nature  and  attributes  of  God  ;  the 
rehgious  and  moral  duties  of  man  ;  reproofs  of  idolatry  and  other 
vices  ;  exhortations  to  the  practice  of  rehgion  and  virtue  ;  together 
with  advice  and  warnings  respecting  the  political  state  of  the  coun- 
try and  the  administration  of  affairs,  which,  in  the  theocratical  form 
of  government,  were  sent  to  the  kings  and  princes  of  the  Hebrews  by 
the  prophets  as  ambassadors  of  their  supreme  monarch  Jehovah. 
Those  writers  of  the  present  agOr  who,  from  this  latter  portion  of  the 
contents  of  the  prophetic  Scriptures,  have  concluded  that  to  prophesy 
means  merely  to  utter  some  wise  saying,  {etwas  weises  sagen,)  have 
childishly  played  upon  the  etymology  of  the  German  word  weissageti, 
when  the  etymology  of  the  original  Hebrew  leads  to  a  very  different 
meaning.  Nor  are  they  less  in  error  who  represent  the  prophets  as 
mere  demagogues ;  for  in  fact  they  were  so  far  from  attempting  to 
obtain  any  influence  among  the  populace,  that  they  criminated  the 
people  as  well  as  the  kings,  the  nobles,  and  the  priests,  and  even 
threatened  foreign  nations  with  destruction.  Besides,  their  instruc- 
tions relate  much  oftener  to  religious  and  moral,  than  to  political  af- 
fairs, and  several  of  the  prophets,  as  for  instance  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah. 


312         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK: 

were,  at  the  very  commencement  of  their  ministry,  warned  by  Goj> 
that  they  should  be  unable  to  produce  any  effect  by  their  predictions  ; 
so  that  it  could  never  have  been  their  intention  to  set  themselves  up 

as  demagogues. Finally,  it  may  be  remarked  that  the  object  of 

the  prophecies  is  not  merely  to  satisfy  a  desire  of  knowing  the  future, 
nor  to  afford  assistance  in  particular  difficulties  without  any  ulterior 
aim,  but  is  everywhere  grand  and  uniform,  viz.  to  preserve  the 
knowledge  of  God  from  perishing.  [6] 

K3J,  I     •    is  in  Arabic,  to  utter  a  low  and  indistinct  sound,  e.g.  the 

growling  of  a  dog,  being  an  onomatopoietic  word  formed  from  the  sound 

BA.*     So  DWi  in  Arabic    -»\j    is  to  sigh,  to  breathe  out  strongly,  from 

the  sound  am  or  nam.  Both  words  were  first  applied  to  the  sounds  ut- 
tered by  the  spirits  who  were  supposed  to  be  raised  by  necromancers, 
and  who,  it  was  imagined,  spoke  only  in  a  low  and  murmuring  voice ; 
afterwards,  they  were,  without  any  regard  to  their  etymology,  transfer- 

^  /  f 
red  to  divine  revelations.     Hence    f     •    (N3J)  signifies  also  generally, 

to  announce.    N03,  therefore,  does  not  signify  one  who  speaks  wisely,  but 

o)ie  who  receives  and  announces  divine  revelations.  The  same  character 
is  alluded  to  in  the  other  names  for  a  prophet,  NTn,  a  seer,  one  who 

views,  enjoys  a  prospect  of  the  future ;  and  DTlvN  li^'X  a  man  of  God, 

not  in  the  sense  in  which  Plato  was  called  divine,  but  in  that  of  bein" 
familiar  with  God,  taught  by  God,  a  messenger  of  God.  We  find  the  title 
of  prophet  (n'^J)  first  applied  to  Abraham,  Gen.  xx.  7.,  after  he  had 

received  several  revelations  from  the  Deity,  and  had  announced  them 
to  his  family  ;  Gen.  xii.  1 — 3,  7.  xiii.  14 — 17.  xv.  1 — 21.  xvii,  1 — 21. 
xviii.  The  meaning  of  the  word  is  clearly  expressed  in  Ex.  iv.  15,  16- 
comp.  Ex.  vii.  1.  Lastly,  all  the  prophets  acted  in  the  capacity  of  per- 
sons admitted  to  a  knowledge  of  the  divine  counsels,  and  announcing 
their  predictions  in  obedience  to  the  divine  commands.  This  function 
constitutes  the  proper   signification   of  the  words    N'^J,    N3J,    N3jn, 

which  contain  the  combined  idea  of  annoutuing  and  teaching  :  for  the 
*  [Sec  MiCHAELis  Supplem.  ad.  Lex.  Heb.  p.  153.  s.  No.  1498.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  313 

prophets,  at  the  same  time  that  they  announced  the  divine  commands, 
taught  the  principles  of  rehgion,  and  inculcated  piety.  All  the  other 
significations  of  these  words,  such  as,  to  perform  a  supernatural  act, 
Jicclus.  xlviii.  13.,  comp.  I!  Ki.  xiii.  20,  21 ;  to  sing  and  play  upon  mU' 
steal  instruments,  I  Sam.  x.  5,  6,  10.  xix.  20 — 24.  I  Chr.  xxv.  1 — 3. 
Prov.  XXX.  1 ;  are  tropical.      But  in  I  Sam.  xviii.  10,  X3jnn,  used  of 

Saul  in  his  state  of  derangement,  takes  the  reciprocal  signification  pro- 
per to  its  form,  and  means  conducted  himself  as  a  prophet :  for  the  insa- 
nity of  Saul  led  him  to  imagine  himself  a  prophet ;  this  was  the  fixed 
idea  with  him,  and  hence  he  acted  as  a  prophet,  and  predicted  the 
downfal  of  his  kingdom,  an  event  with  which  Samuel  had  threat- 
ened him.  [c] 

[a)  On  this  subject  see  Hhrd  on  Prophecy.  Serm.  I.  pp.  16.  ss.] 
[6)  "  God  gave  the  prophecies,  not  to  gratify  men's  curiosities  by  en- 
abling them  to  foreknow  things,  but  that  after  they  were  fulfilled  they 
might  be  interpreted  by  the  event,  and  His  own  providence,  not  the  in- 
terpreter's, be  then  manifested  thereby  to  the  world.  For  the  event  of 
things  predicted  many  ages  before,  will  then  be  a  convincing  argument 
that  the  world  is  governed  by  Providence."  Sir  I.  Newton  on  Daniel, 
p.  251.  s.     But  comp.  Hurd  on  Prophecy,  Lect.  I.  p.  17.  ss.  Am.  ed.] 

[c)  On  the  subject  of  this  note  see  some  judicious  observations  in 
WiTsii  Miscellanea  Sacra,  Lib.  I.  c.  i.     TV.] 

§  84.     The  statutes  of  Moses  concerning  prophets. 

Prophecy  being  necessary  in  the  early  ages  for  the  preservation  of 
the  knowledge  of  God,  in  the  Hebrew  commonwealth,  prophets 
were  not  merely  tolerated,  as  some  have  supposed,  but  promised, 
lest  the  Hebrews  should  have  recourse  to  soothsayers  who  were 
idolaters  and  would  seduce  them  to  idolatry.  Deut.  xviii.  9 — 22. 
But,  that  advantage  might  not  be  taken  of  this  institution  by  false 
prophets,  Moses  decreed  that  impostors  should  suffer  capital  punish- 
ment, and  furnished  the  judges  with  two  distinguishing  marks  by 
which  a  false  prophet  might  be  known.  1)  The  prophet  who  should 
endeavour  to  introduce  the  worship  of  other  gods  beside  Jehovah, 
was  to  be  considered  as  an  impostor,  and,  as  a  rebel  against  their 
king,  to  be  capitally  punished  ;  Deut.  xiii.  2 — 6.  2)  Whoever 
should  predict  any  thing  which  was  not  accomplished  by  the  event, 
although  he  should  do  it  in  the  name  of  Jehovah,  was,  as  an  impos- 
tor who  had  presumed  to  counterfeit  the  seal  of  their  king,  to  be 

40 


314    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

condemned  to  death  ;  Dent,  xviii.  20.  ss.  Hence  it  is  plain  that  the 
prophets  were  not  sagacious  men,  whose  perspicacity  enabled  them 
to  foresee  future  events  ;  for  an  error  committed  by  such,  and  unac- 
companied by  guilt,  would  never  have  received  from  Moses  so  severe 
a  punishment. 

§  85.     Evidences  of  a  divine  mission. 

In  consequence  of  the  laws  noticed  in  the  preceding  section  a  pro- 
phet ran  a  great  risk  in  undertaking  a  divine  mission,  unless  he  knew 
by  infaUible  proofs,  that  he  had  really  received  the  commands  of  the 
Deity,  and  was  not  deluded  by  his  own  imagination.  Of  the  na- 
ture of  these  proofs  we  are  not  informed,  although  some  circumstan- 
ces are  recorded  which  show  that  the  prophets  were  certainly  pos- 
sessed of  them.  For  instance,  it  is  mentioned,  I  Sam.  iii.  7.  that  at 
first  Samuel  did  not  know  the  voice  of  God,  and  Jeremiah,  c.  xxxii. 
6 — 9,  confesses  that  it  was  the  correspondence  of  the  event  which 
assured  him  that  the  direction  to  buy  the  field  of  his  relative  had 
come  to  him'from  God.  Comp.J  also  Jer.  xxviii.  9.  The  proofs  by 
which  Moses  was  satisfied  respecting  his  divine  commission,  are  re- 

•  corded  at  length,  Ex.  iii.  1 — iv.  17.  That  the  prophets  had  other 
means  of  distinguishing  divine  revelations  from  their  own  thoughts,^ 
appears  from  I  Sam.  xvi.  6.  s.  II  Sam.  vii.  1 — 17.  I  Chr.  xvii.  1 — 16. 
Isa.  xxxviii.  1 — 8.  II  Ki.  xx.  1 — 11.  Occasionally  the  impression 
made  by  the  revelation  was  so  strong  that  it  was  impossible  to  doubt 
of  its  origin  ;  so  that  they  confess  themselves  unable  to  refrain  from 
speaking,  as  Jer.  xx.  7 — 10.  The  means  indeed  by  which  they 
distinguished  their  own  thoughts  from  divine  revelations,  they  could 
not  express  in  words,  just  as  it  is  impossible  to  explain  to  one  unac- 
quainted with  the  subject,  how  we  know  the  painter  of  a  picture,  or  the 

author  of  a  composition,  solely  by  his  style  alone. To  the  hearers 

and  first  readers  of  the  prophets  their  divine  mission  was  proved  either 
by  miracles  predicted  and  accordingly  performed-  or,  if  such  were  not 
granted,  by  the  event  corresponding  with  the  prophecies.  For  the  • 
prophecies  were  of  a  twofold  description  ;  some  relating  to  proxi- 
mate, others  to  remote  events.  Those  of  the  former  kind,  which 
were  clear,  and  contained|  various  circumstances  of  the  predicted 

^events  which  must  necessarily  be  beyond  the  reach  of  human  fore- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  315 

sight,  aftbrded  by  their  completion?^a  proof  to  .the  contemporaries  of 
the  prophet,  that  he  was  a  messenger  of  God,  and  that  his  predic- 
tions concerning  remote  events,  coming  from  the  same  source  with 
those  which  they  had  seen  fulfilled,  were  worthy  of  equal  credit. [a] 
The  accomplishment  of  these  would  afford  to  posterity  the  proof  of 
his  divine  mission.  This  consequence  was  so  evident,  that  not  a  few 
even  of  the  heathens,  among  whom  Cyrus  may  be  mentioned  as  a 
most  remarkable  instance,  were  convinced  by  it,  and  acknowledged 
that  the  author  of  these  prophecies  must  be  the  one  true  GoD.[i] 
It  was  necessary  therefore  that  the  prophets  should  secure  the  cre- 
dence of  their  contemporaries  in  that  portion  of  their  prophecies 
which  related  to  remote  events,  by  some  predictions  respecting 
events  of  speedy  occurrence.  Tliis  accounts  for  the  fact  that  the 
prophets  sometimes  predicted  proximate  events  of  little  moment  with 
as  much  care  as  others  of  far  more  importance  :  comp.  II  Sam. 
xii.  14.  xxiv.  11  —  14.  I  Ki.  xi.  31.s.  xiii,  1 — 5.  xiv.  G,  12.  Isa.  vii. 
4 — 16.  xxxviii.  4 — 8.    Jer.  xxviii.  16.  s.  xxxvii.  1 — xxxviii.  28. [c] 

[a)  Comp.  I  Sam.  iii.  19.  s.  where  the  general  knowledge  of  the  fact 
that  Samuel  was  a  divinely  commissioned  prophet  is  stated  as  a  conse- 
quence of  God's  '  letting  none  of  his  words  fall  to  the  ground,'  i.  e.  of 
the  regular  fulfilment  of  his  predictions.     Tr.] 

[6)  The  prophets  themselveSj  occasionally  refer  to  this  evidence  of 
their  divine  mission,  and  draw  plainly  the  distinction  between  the  proxi- 
mate events,  by  predicting  which  they  obtained  credence  for  their  other 
prophecies,  and  those  more  remote  which  it  was  their  principal  object  to 
foretell.  Comp.  Isa.  xli.  22.  xlii.  9.  xliv.  7.  a.  xlviii.  3.  Jer.  xxviii.  9. 
For  an  enumeration  of  prophecies  of  proximate  events  and  their  ac- 
complishment, see  Allix's  Reflections  on  the  Old  Testament,  c.  iii.,  in 
Watson's  Tracts,  Vol.  I.  p.  358.  ss.  ed.  2d.     TV.] 

[c)  On  the  subject  of  this  section  see  WiTSii  ^Miscellanea  Sacra, 
Lib.  I.  c.  XV.     Tr.] 

§  86.     Character  of  the  divine  revelation- 

At  the  present  day,  we  are  unable  from  want  of  experience,  either 
to  ascertain  or  express  the  nature  of  the  divine  operation  on  the  minds 
of  the  prophets,  and  the  prophets  themselves  could  not  express  it,  for 
want  of  words.  This  is  not  to  be  wondered  'at,  since  even  the  regu- 
lar course  of  nature  cannot  be  perfectly  explained,  and  many  parts  of 


316         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

it  are  entirely  incomprehensible,  and  yet  not  the  less  certain  ;  for  in- 
stance, the  connexion  of  the  soul  and  body,  man's  free  will,  creation, 
and  other  things  of  the  same  kind.  We,  who  cannot  comprehend  the 
nature  of  our  own  soul,  nor  the  power  of  God,  are  certainly  unable 
either  to  show  that  God  cannot  operate  upon  our  spirit,  or,  admitting 
that  he  does,  to  describe  the  manner ;  if  we  attempt  to  do  either,  we 
do  but  vainly  trifle  with  words.  The  question,  whether  the  divine  in- 
fluence on  the  minds  of  the  prophets  was  of  a  natural  or  supernatural 
kind,  would  be  more  readily  settled,  if  it  were  considered  that  with 
respect  to  the  Deity,  no  such  distinction  can  exist,  his  mode  of  ope- 
ration being  uniform.  The  distinction  has  arisen  from  our  mode  of 
thinking,  in  which  we  ought  not  and  cannot  confound  operations 
wliich,  in  the  circumstances  connected  with  them,  are  exceedingly 
diverse.  It  is  with  propriety  therefore  that  we  distinguish  divine  re- 
velations from  the  natural  operations  of  the  mind.  Perhaps  some 
revelations  relating  to  proximate  events,  may  be  explained  on  the  sup- 
position of  the  divine  influence  leading  the  prophet  to  draw  conclu- 
sions from  facts  already  known  to  him,  which  would  else  have  been 
beyond  his  powers  of  reasoning.  But  in  this  case  it  is  necessary  to 
suppose  that  the  prophet  was  conscious  of  this  divine  assisting  influ- 
ence, for  otherwise  he  could  never  have  been  able  to  speak  with  so 
much  accuracy  and  confidence  concerning  events  which  although 
proximate  were  still  future.  Comp.  Isa.  c.  vii.  c.  xxxvi.  xxxvii,  and 
c.  xxxviii.  1 — 8.  Other  revelations  cannot  be  explained  in  this  manner, 
especially  such  as  relate  to  remote  ages,  and  those  which  refer  to  very 
near  events,  such  as  those  contained  in  Exod.  vii — xi.  xiv.  xix.  10 — 
XX.  18.  Num.  xi.  18,  31.  All  the  accounts  that  we  have  of  the  mode 
of  revelation  may  be  reduced  to  the  following  particulars. 

I.  A  conversation  with  God,  and  an  appearance  of  the  Deity  under 
some  visible  form,  the  prophet  being  neither  in  a  trance  nor  in  a 
dream.  This  sort  of  revelation  is  mentioned  Num.  xii.  6.  ss.,  as  the 
highest  and  most  valuable  :  comp.  Gen.  xviii,  xix. 

II.  A  revelation  made  in  a  trance,  during  which  ideas  and  symbolic 
representations  were  presented  to  the  imagination  of  the  prophet,  or 
the  future  was  exhibited  as  it  were  in  distant  prospect.  Hence  pro- 
phecies were  called  visions  or  sights,  and  the  prophets  seers  or 
watchmen,  [o] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  317 

III.  Dreams.  1 )  Such  as  needed  explanation,  and  were  given  to  per- 
sons not  invested  with  the  prophetic  character,  as  to  Fharaoh,  Gen. 
xh.,  and  to  Nebuchadnezzar,  Dan.  ii  and  iv.  These  merely  afforded 
occasion  to  prophets,  by  giving  the  interpretation,  to  announce  the 
revelations  made  to  themselves  2)  Such  as  were  somewhat  more 
clear,  and  given  to  prophets.  These  scarcely  differed  from  visions  :[b] 
for  which  reason  the  words  pin,  nj<"iD,  a  vision,  a  view,  and  Di'?n,  « 

dream-,  are  used  as  synonymous  Num.  xii.  6  ;  as  are  also  N'DJ  a  pro- 
phet, and  D^n  a  dreamer,  Deut.  xiii.  2,  4,  6.  (1,  3,  5)  ;  aad  elsewhere 
m'?n  a  dream,  and  pin,  a  vision,  are  synonymous  :  Isa.  xxix.  10.  Joe 

iii.  1.  (ii.  28.)  Zech.  i.  7.  s.  x.  2. Occasionally  this  species  of  re- 
presentation was  afforded  to  the  prophets  while  awake.  Comp. 
I  Ki.  xxii.  19—23. 

IV.  A  voice  from  heaven  or  the  aerial  regions,  which  seems  to  have 
resembled  articulate  thunder:  Gen.  xxii.  11.  s.  15 — 19.  Ex.  xx. 
John  xii.  28.  s.  Mat.  iii.  17.  xvii.  5.  II  Pet.  i.  17.  Acts  ix.  4.  ss.  In 
the  Talmud  this  species  of  revelation  is  called  Sip  n3  (the  daughter  of 

the  voice)  and  is  said  to  have  supplied  the  place  of  prophets  during , 
the  existence  of  the  second  temple.  Josephus  de  Bel.  Jud.  VI.  v. 
3,  4.  declares  that  this  voice  was  heard  in  the  temple  of  Jerusalem 
before  its  destruction  in  which  he  is  followed  by  Tacitus,  Hist.  V.  12. 
But  Josephus  gives  his  relation  merely  from  rumour  ;  and  the  Tal- 
mudists  are  the  less  worthy  of  credit  because  they  childishly  trifle  with 
respect  to  the  Sip  n3,  deciding  that  a  speech  made  in  one  sense,  and 

unexpectedly  taken  in  a  different,  is  a  voice  from  heaven  ;  which  is 
exactly  similar  to  the  heathen  theory  of  omens  :  Talmud  Jerus.  tract. 
Shabbath.  p.  8.,  Cicero  de  Divinat.  I.  46.  The  term  used  by  them, 
moreover,  is  equivocal,  since  Sip  n3,  in  Chaldee  xSp  r\3  and  »s'7p  m3, 

•J 
and  in  Syriac  1]^     ZiO  '  ^^^  ^^^y^  with  the  Arabic    UlA-O 

— 1 1  signifies  an  echo,  but  also  means  simply  a  voice,  and  even 


j<J' 


318  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    DOOK 

a  word.     See  Bcxtorf.  Lex.  Chald.  Talm.  col.  320,  Peshito  Syriac 
version  in  Rom.  x.  16.  ss.  Gal.  iv.  20.  Heb.  iii.  15.[c] 

V.  An  internal  divine  revelation,  which  as  has  been  already  remark- 
ed, was  sometimes  a  divine  direction,  by  the  influence  of  which  the 
prophet  drew  conclusions  from  things  previously  known  ;  but  gene- 
rally, and  especially  when  relating  to  far  distant  events,  it  included 
something  more.[(ZJ  * 

[a)  On  the  subject  of  this  and  the  succeeding  paragraph,  see  WiTSii 
Miscell.  Sacra.  L.  I.  c.  iii.  ^  9.  and  c.  iv.  v.    Tr.] 

[b)  The  assertion  here  made  by  Jahn  must  be  somewhat  modified  :  in 
Num.  xii.  6.  the  phrases  jrilDK  vbn  71X1:23  and  13   "(^IX  DlSn^,  are 

not  necessarily  synonymous,  but  may  be  taken  as  expressive  of  different 
species  of  the  same  genus ;  in  Deut.  xiii.  2,  4,  6.  this  is  most  probably  the 
sense,  since  they  are  connected  by  the  disjunctive  particle  IN.     Tr.] 

[c)  On  the  nature  fee.  of  the  Sip  r\3,  see  Vitbiwgae  Dissertatio  de 

Revelatione  Coelesti  Judaeis  dicta  Filia  vocis,  in  Observationibus  Sacris. 
Tom.  11.  Lib.  VI.  c.  x.     Tr.] 

[rf)  The  division  of  prophetic  revelation  made  by  Jahn  in  this  section, 
is  given  almost  in  so  many  words  by  Kimchi  (Praef  ad  Psalmos),  who 
also  notices  the  distinction  made  in  V.  Comp.  WiTSii  Praef.  ad  Misc. 
Sacra.  }  xiv.     Tr.] 

§  87.     Prophetic  style. 

The  prophecies  are  generally  clothed  in  a  poetic  dress.  In  conse- 
quence of  this  many  things  are  inserted  merely  for  ornament,  and 
must  not  be  very  greatly  pressed  in  exposition  so  as  to  lay  stress  on 
every  word  and  every  expression  ;  but  the  general  method  of  inter- 
pretation must  be  observed  which  is  followed  in  reading  uninspired 
poetical  productions.  Some  prophecies  however  are  written  in 
prose,  as  those  which  are  contained  in  the  book  of  Genesis,  except 
c.  xlix.jt  and  in  Lev.  xxvi.  and  Deut.  xxviii — xxx.  and  some  of  the 
more  recent,  as  in  Malachi,  Haggai,  Zechariah,  c.  i — viii.  and 
Daniel :  but  even  in  these  the  style  occasionally  assumes  a  lofty  and 
poetic    character. The  symbolical  representations,    which  were 

*  [Concerning  which,  we  are  destitute  of  any  information  or  certain  ground  of 
reasoning.     Tr.'\ 

t  [Chap.  is.  25—27.  is  certainly  poetic.  Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TES-fAMENT.  31 9 

displayed  to  the  prophets,  and  their  visions  or  prospects  of  futurity, 
could  not  easily  assume  a  poetical  form  without  increasing  their  ob- 
scurity ;  accordingly  they  are  narrated  in  prose. With   respect 

to  the  symbolical  actions,  which  the  prophets  occasionally  describe, 
Staeudlin,  in  his  Beytrage  zur  Erlauterung  der  Propheten,  S.  123 
— 240,  has  contended  that  they  were  not  really  performed,  but  are 
merely  related  in  the  manner  of  parables.  Perhaps  in  some  instances, 
as  in  Jer.  xiii.  1 — 9.  xxv.  16 — 29.  Ezek.  xxiv.  3 — 12,  this  was  the 
case,  [a]  But  that  some  at  least  were  real  transactions,  Staeudlin 
himself  was  forced  to  confess,  convinced  by  the  clearness  of  the  ac- 
count, as  in  Jer.  xxvii.  xxviii.  xxxii  xxxv.  xliii.  Ezek.  xxiv.  15 — 27. 
xxxvii.  15 — 28  :  and  to  many  others  the  same  observation  might  be 
apphed.  See  Ezek.  iv.  v.  1 — 4.  xii.  1 — 7.  Hos.  i.  iii.  Isa.  viii.  1 — 3. 
XX.  These  extraordinary  actions  of  the  prophets  excited  the  atten- 
tion of  their  contemporaries,  and  thus  procured  an  increased  publicity 
for  their  predictions.  Some  may  appear^not  altogether  consistent  with 
our  views  of  decorum  ;  but  we  must  consider  that  the  ideas  of  the 
ancient  inhabitants  of  the  East  differed  on  this  subject  from  our  own  : 
not  to  say,  that  Staeudlin  has  misunderstood  the  nature  of  some  of 
the  actions  to  which  he  objects.  For  instance,  he  supposes  that 
Isaiah,  c.  xx.,  went  entirely  naked,  whereas  the  phrase  to  he  naked 
among  the  orientals  means,  nothing  more  than  being  clothed  only  in 
the  garment  called  Ehram,  in  which  dress  labouring  husbandmen,  and 
even  pilgrims  of  high  rank,  when  they  reach  the  bounds  of  Meccah, 
appear,  even  at  the  present  day,  without  any  breach  of  decorum. 
Comp.  Archseol.  P  II.  Th.  II   §  144.  p.  73.  ss.  (Upham's  Translation. 

§  120). [6] It    has   been    supposed   that  the    visions   which    the 

prophets  describe  did  not  in  reality  take  place  ;  that  they  merely  con- 
stitute the  clothing  in  which  their  views  of  futurity  are  represented. 
Tliis  is  entirely  unsusceptible  of  proof,  since  the  prophets  themselves 
constantly  assert  that  these  visions  were  really  seen  by  them,  and  no 
reason  can  be  given  why  they  should  involve  their  revelations  in  so 
obscure  a  covering  if  they  had  originally  received  them  in  another 
form.  This  objection,  however,  will  the  less  concern  the  careful  inter- 
preter, inasmuch  as  theseTvisions,  whether  they  were  merely  a  parti- 
cular mode  of  representing  facts,  or  real  events,  require  exactly  the 
same  method  of  interpretation  ;    namely  that  of  symbols,  in  which 


320  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH    BOOK 

some  circumstances  have  no  definite  meaning  but  only  serve  to  fill  up 
the  picture.  Hence  the  chief  object  to  be  aimed  at  by  the  interpre- 
ter is  to  ascertain  what  is  the  principal  feature  of  the  vision,  and  what 
is  signified  by  it.  This  may  generally  be  learned  either  from  express 
declarations,  or  from  some  indirect  indications. [c] 

[a)  See  Blaynf.y  on  Jeremiah  xiii.  4.  "  Translation,  fcc."  p.  288.  and 
Letters  of  certain  Jews  to  Monsieur  Voltaire,  pp.  261 — 265.  ed.  Phil. 
1795.     TV.] 

[6)  For  some  good  answers  to  infidel  objections  to  such  passages  of 
the  prophecies,  see  the  Jews'  Letters  to  Voltaire,  Part  U.  Let.  IX.  pp. 
252.  ss.     TV.] 

[c)  On  symbolic  vision  see  WiTSli  Miscellanea  Sacra  Lib,  L  c. 
xii.     Tr.'\ 

§  88.     Of  the  fulfilment  of  the  prophecies. 

The  serious  disputes  which  have  arisen  respecting  the  accomplish- 
ment of  prophecies,  may  be  decided  without  much  difficulty,  if  proper 
care  be  taken  to  set  aside  such  predictions  as  relate  to  events  of  which 
either  no  memorials,  or  such  only  as  are  very  slight  and  insufficient, 
are  contained  in  history,  as  is  the  case  with  respect  to  the  Philistines, 
the  Moabites  the  Assyrians,  the  Egyptians  and  the  Ethiopians.  S'ge 
Isa,  xix.  29 — 32  xv  xvi.  xx.  Ezek.  xxix — xxxii.  Of  these  nations 
some  fragments  of  history  remain,  which  Josephus  (Ant,  Jud,  X.  xi.  12. 
and  against  Apion  I.  20.),  Strabo  (p.  687,)  and  Eusebius  (Praep. 
Evang.  !X.  41.)  from  Megasthenes  and  Berosus,  have  preserved.  The 
accomplishment  of  prophecies  relating  to  these  nations,  and  others 
similarly  circumstanced  cannot  indeed  be  pointed  out,  but  on  the 
other  hand  neither  can  they  be  disproved.  It  must  also  be  observed, 
that  many  prophecies  foretold  events  which  occupied  long  periods  of 
time,  as  the  return  of  the  ten  tribes  from  exile,  the  complete  destruc- 
tion of  Babylon,  &c.  The  fulfilment  of  these  predictions  gra- 
dually increased  from  a  small  beginning,  and  was  not  completed  until 
after  the  lapse  of  ages.  It  had  its  germ,  its  growth,  its  bloom  and  its 
ripeness,  [a] Some  prophecies  are  not  yet  fulfilled,  as  those  rela- 
ting to  the  blessing  which  is  to  come  upon  all  nations  through  the  seed 
of  Abraham,  to  the  propagation  of  the  true  religion  throughout  the 
world,  and  to  the  conversion  of  the  Jews  to  their  second  king  Da?id, 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  321 

the  Messiah  :  comp.  Rom.  xi.  25.  ss.  Of  such  it  cannot  be  said,  any 
more  than  of  the  two  preceding  classes,  that  they  have  not  been  ve- 
rified by  the  event. Lastly,  some  prophecies   were  hypothetically 

made,  the  event  only  to  take  place  upon  the  performance  of  certain 
conditions. 

If  such  prophecies  as  those  which  have  just  been  enumerated  are 
carefully  separated  from  the  rest,  there  will  not  remain  a  single  pro- 
phecy, the  fulfilment  of  which  cannot  be  ascertained. 

[«)  See  Horsley's  excellent  remarks.  Serm.  XVII.     7>.l 


41 


322        PARTICUJ^AR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH   BOOK 


CHAPTER  II. 


Of  THE  PKOPHETS  CNDDR  UZZIAH,  JOTHAM,  AHAZ  AND  HEZEKIAH, 
WHO  REIGNED  FKOM  801  TO  699  B.  C;  FROM  164  TO  276 
AFTER   THE    DIVISION, 


§  89.     Amos. 

Amos,  DlDi?,  was  a  native  of  Tekoah,  a  city  nearly  eleven  English 

miles  south  of  Jerusalem.*     In  Am.  vii.  14.  he  is  called  npn,  not  a 

herdsman,  from  ip3,  a  herd  of  oxen,  but  as  v.  15,  shows,  a  shep- 

herd,  from  the  Aramaean  I  ♦<*i"^  ,  a  herd  of  any  kind ;  and  in  c.  i.  1 , 

he  uses  the  term  ipij,  from  the  Arabic  word     %  •• ,    ,  which  means 

an  inferior  kind  of  sheep.  The  prophet  left  the  place  of  his  nativity, 
and  went  to  Bethel,  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  the  seat  of  the  golden 
calf,  where  he  exercised  his  prophetic  office.  Although  he  was  or- 
dered to  leave  the  country  by  Amaziah  the  priest,  who  also  informed 
the  king,  Jeroboam  II.  against  him,  he  still  continued  to  pro- 
phesy, and  rephed,  that  he  was  not  hke  those  prophets  who  were 
nourished  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  nor  was  he  a  son,  i.  e.  a  disciple  of 
prophets,  who  would  have  learned  the  art  of  divining  in  order  to  gain 
his  bread,  but  a  shepherd,  who  could  content  himself  with  such  fare 
as  the  sycamore  would  supply,  vii.  10 — 17.  Unless  therefore  Amos 
intended  to  express  merely  his  contentment  under  any  circumstances, 
it  is  plain  that  he  was  not  a  rich  man.  Neither  on  the  other  hand 
was  he  a  servant,  for  in  that  case  he  could  not  have  left  his  flock  and 

*  [The  author  says  two  Geiraan  miles  and  two-fifths.    A  German  mile  is  four  and 
1  half  English.     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  323 

master.     He  was  the  owner  of  a  flock,  and   according  to  the  con- 
dition of  the  Nomads,  a  respectable  man. It  appears  from  i.  1 

tliat  he  composed  the  book  after  his  return  to  Tckoah. 

§  90.     Age  of  the  prophet  Amos. 

The  inscription  of  the  book  proves  that  Amos  wrote  it  under  Uz- 
ziah  king  of  Judah,  and  Jeroboam  11.  king  of  Israel.  This  is 
confirmed  by  the  contents.  The  state  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel  is  ex- 
hibited, as  it  was  re-established  by  Jeroboam  II.  ;   comp.  2  Kings 

xiv.  23 — 28,  with  Amos  vi.  13,  14. The  vices  reproved  are  those 

which  the  prosperous  condition  of  the  state  would  encourage  the 
people  to  commit  with  boldness,  such  as  idolatry,  incest,  oppressions, 
frauds,  and  others  of  a  similar  nature.  See  ii.  6.  iii.  10,  14.  s.  iv.  4.  s. 
V.  6,  10,  20,  s.  vi.  4.  ss.  viii.  5.  s.  A  corruption  of  morals  to  such 
an  extent  proves  that  the  prophet  must  have  arisen  some  time  after 
the  conquests  of  Jeroboam,  and  this  opinion  derives  strength  from  the 
title,  which  names  King  Uzziah,  who  did  not  mount  the  throne  of  Ju- 
dah until  the  27th  year  of  Jeroboam.  The  prophet  seems  to  have  pub- 
lished his  book  before  Jeroboam's  death,  since  he  says  nothing  of  the 
distractions  by  which  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was  agitated  immediately 
after  that  event.  Nothing  can  be  inferred  from  the  more  definite 
mark  of  time  contained  in  the  words  :  "  two  years  before  the  earth- 
quake," i.  1.;  because  the  year  of  that  remarkable  earthquake,  which 
is  mentioned  also  by  Zechariah,  xiv.  5.,  is  unknown. 

We  must  be  satisfied  therefore  with  placing  the  age  of  the  book 
within  the  last  fourteen  years  of  Jeroboam,  i.  e.  798 — 784.  B.  C 
177 — 191  after  the  division. 

§  91.     Contents  of  the  Boole  of  Amos. 

The  subject  of  the  book  regards  the  kingdom  of  Israel.  In  the 
first  two  chapters  indeed,  which  may  be  considered  as  introductory, 
it  threatens  the  neighbouring  kingdoms  as  well  as  those  of  Judah  and 
Israel  with  destruction  by  fire  and  sword.  1)  The  Syrians  of  Damas- 
cus, because  they  had  threshed  the  Gileadites  to  death  with  iron  instru- 
ments ;  2)  the  PhiUstine  states,  3)  and  the  Tyrians,  because  they  had 
delivered  the  fugitive  Hebrews  into  the  hands  of  the  Edomites ;  4)  the 
Edomites,  because  of  the  persevering  enmity  which  they  had  shown 


324  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

to  their  Hebrew  brethren  ;  5)  the  Ammonites,  because  of  their  cruel 
conduct  to  defenceless  females  ;  6)  the  Moabites,  for  destroying  by 
fire  the  crown  prince  of  Edom,  comp.  II  Kings,  iii.  27.;  7)  the  Jews, 
on  account  of  their  habitual  contempt  of  the  instructions  of  Jehovah  ; 
and  8)  the  Israelites,  for  their  various  transgressions  of  the  law.  iii. 

The  four  following  chapters  comprise  reproofs  denounced  against 
vices  prevailing  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  with  a  prediction  of  its  over- 
throw by  cruel  wars,  iii — vi. 

In  vii.  1 — 9,  are  contained  three  visions  ;  1)  of  the  grasshoppers, 
2)  of  the  fire  which  consumed  the  sea,  3)  of  Jehovah's  appearance 
with  a  plumb-line  on  the  wall  of  Samaria  ;  the  first  two  representing 
punishments  not  carried  into  full  execution,  the  civil  wars  perhaps  of 
the  two  following  interregna ;  the  third  signifying  the  complete  de- 
struction of  the  kingdom. Then  follow  an  account  of  the  conduct 

of  Amaziah,  and  the  prophecy  of  Amos  concerning  him,  v.  10 — 17. 

In  c.  viii.  the  prophet  sees  a  basket  of  ripe  summer  figs,  an  em- 
blem of  the  Israelites,  fit  to  be  consumed  by  their  enemies.  This 
is  followed  by  a  threat  of  severe  and  general  punishment.  The  last 
vision  ix.  1 — 10,  represents  the  execution  of  the  threat.  The  pro- 
phet sees  God  standing  on  the  altar  at  Bethel,  and  hears  the  com- 
mand to  strike  the  capitals  of  the  pillars  that  they  might  crush  the 
heads  of  those  who  were  present,  and  the  annunciation  of  death  by 
the  sword  to  all  who  should  escape ;  a  figure  of  Israel's  destruction. 
Then  he  represents  in  general  expressions  the  time  of  the  Messiah, 
whom  he  sees  in  a  dark  futurity.  He  predicts  the  restoration  of  the 
house  of  David,  and  that  the  other  nations  should  worship  the  true 
God.  Comp.  v,  11.  in  the  Sept.  with  Acts  xv.  16.  Then  reverting 
to  times  nearer  his  own,  he  predicts  the  return  and  re-establishment 
of  the  ten  tribes,  v.  13 — 15.  The  prophecies  in  this  book  which  merit 
particular  attention  are  the  following.  1 )  That  the  Syrians  should  be 
removed  to  the  shores  of  the  Kir,  Kur  or  Cyrus,  a  river  which  emp- 
ties into  the  western  side  of  the  Caspian  in  the  39th  degree  of  lati- 
tude, i.  6.   This  took  place  between  fifty  and  sixty  years  afterwards. 

Comp.  II  Kings  xvi.  9. 2)  The  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  fire, 

ii.  5  ;  which  happened  200  years  after  the  prophet's  time. 3)  The 

captivity  of  the  Israelites  beyond  Damascus  in  the  north,  and  their 
dispersion,  v.  .5.  6,  27.  vii.  17  ;  which  between  sixty  and  eighty  years 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  325 

afterwards  was  accomplished,  II  Ki.  xv.  29.  xvii. 4)  The  return  of 

the  Israelites  to  their  country,  ix.  14,  15.;  which  gradually  took  place 
through  a  long  period  of  time,  more  than  300  years  after  the  pro- 
phet's day. 5)  The  coming  of  another  David,  i.  e.  the  Messiah, 

at  a  much  more  remote  period  and  the  conversion  of  the  Gentiles, 
ix.  11,  12. 

In  order  to  illustrate  the  supernatural  character  of  the  predictions 
contained  in  this  book,  they  oi.ght  to  be  compared  with  the  history  of 
the  times,  from  which  it  appears  that  when  they  were  made,  the  king- 
doms of  Israel  and  Judah  were  in  a  very  flourishing  condition.  See 
II  Kings  xiv.  1 — 17.  xv.  1 — 7.  II  Chron.  xxv.  xxvi.  Also  II  Kings 
xiii.  1—9,  23,  10—20,  25.  xiv.  8—15.  II  Chron.  xxv.  17—24. 
II  Kings  xiv.  23 — 28.     And  comp.  Germ.  Introd.  p.  408. 

Jeroboam  obtained  the  regal  power  in  the  fifteenth  year  of  Amaziah, 
king  of  Judah,  who  reigned  twenty-seven  years,  and  was  succeeded  by 
his  son  Uzziah  or  Azariah,  11  Kings  xiv.  17,  23.  (I  Chron.  xxv.  25. 
xxvi.  1.  Uzziah  therefore  should  have  mounted  the  throne  in  the  four- 
teenth year  of  Jeroboam  ;  but  in  II  Kings  xv.  1.  this  event  is  placed  in  his 
twenty-seventh  year.  Twelve  years  therefore,  from  the  fourteenth  to 
the  twenty-seventh  of  Jeroboam  are  passed  over  in  the  kingdom  of  Ju- 
dah ;  but  it  is  evident  that  they  cannot  be  considered  as  years  of  anarchy, 
because  the  state  of  the  nation  was  prosperous,  and  Uzziah  is  said  to 
have  taken  the  reins  of  government  immediately  upon  the  death  of  Ama- 
ziah. II  Kings  xiv.  20,  21.  II  Chron.  xxv.  27,  28  xxvi.  1.  It  would  seem 
therefore  that  Jeroboam  was  associated  with  his  father  Joash  in  the  go- 
vernment of  the  kingdom  during  twelve  years,  which,  althougli  they  be- 
long to  the  reign  of  Joash,  are  in  II  King«  xv.  1.  ascribed  to  Jeroboam. 
This  supposition  is  the  more  probable,  as  Joash  himself  was  connected  in 
the  government  during  the  three  last  years  of  his  father  Jehoahaz.  Ac- 
customed therefore  to  a  partner  in  the  throne,  he  associate' 1  his  valiant 
son  Jeroboam  with  himself  in  the  command  of  the  kingdom  immediately 
after  his  father's  death. 

§  92      Style  of  Amos. 

The  style  of  Amos  is  poetical,  not  indeed  sublime,  but  by  no 
means  inferior.  The  tropes  and  ornaments  of  style  are  generally 
taken  from  objects  connected  with  pastoral  life,  yet  are  not  at  all 
wanting  in  dignity.  Comp.  i.  2.  ii.  13.  iii.  4,  5,  8,  12.  iv.  1.  v.  11. 
fvi.  12.]  ix.  1,  [9,]  13.   In  the  vision^  there  is  sometimes  a  want  of  ful- 


326  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

ness  in  the  delineation,  not  so  great  however  as  to  injure  the  repre- 
sentation. When  the  same  subjects  are  several  times  brought  for- 
ward, they  are  represented  under  varied  forms  ;  as  for  instance,  the  op- 
pression of  the  poor  in  ii.  6.  iii.  9.  iv.  1.  v.  11,  12.  viii.  4.,  and  the 
divine  power  in  iv.  13.'- v,  8.  ix  6.  This  shepherd,  therefore,  must 
have  been  a  man  of  some  education,  as  is  further  proved  from  his 
observations  relating  to  geography,  history,  and  astronomy.  See 
i.  3—6,  11,12    ii.  9,  10,  v.  8,  26.  vi.  2,  5,  14.  [viii.  8.]  ix.  7.  ' 

Some  unusual  words,  as  Sl3  and  ptt'Dl  in  iii.  12.,  D3Dtyi3  in  v.  11., 

rr^D,  O'lS,  t]"\D  in  vi.  4,  5,  10.,  0^3  in  vii.  14., [a]  and  some  proverbial 

expressions,  were  perhaps  peculiar  to  the  people  of  Tekoah.  But 
it  is  altogether  without  reason  that  Jerome,  in  his  preface  to  Amos, 
calls  him  a  prophet  unskilled  m  composition.  Some  words  which 
are  more  than  usually  harsh,  such  as  3NnD  for  3j;nD  in  vi.  8.,  and 

TiND  for  nxo  in  viii.  8.,  are  probably  errors  of  transcribers,  [ft] 

[a)  See  Mirn.  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  Nos.  491,  302,  1784,  1790, 
2067      Tr.] 

[b)  De  Wette  thinks  that  Amos  is  probably  the  most  regular  with 
respect  to  composition  of  all  the  prophets.  He  frequently  uses  that 
species  of  measured  style  in  which  a  certain  phrase  is  regularly  repeated 
as  a  burthen,  comp.  i.  2 — li.  16.  iv.  6 — 11.  vii.  1 — 6.  ix.  2—4.  His  il- 
lustrations are  full,  (iii.  3 — 6.  vi.  4 — 6,  9,  10.)  and  his  expressions  occa- 
sionally assume  a  considerable  degree  of  strength  and  sublimity :  comp. 
iv.  13.  V.  8.  viii.  7.  ss.  ix.  5.  s.  Repetitions  of  the  same  expression  are 
observable,  iv.  13.  v.  8,  27.  ix.  6 ;  and  a  fondness  for  certain  classes  of 
figures,  as  those  drawn  from  the  eflfects  of  fire,  i.  4 — ii.  5.  v.  6.  vii.  4., 
and  those  derived  from  an  inundation,  viii.  8.  ix.  5.  v.  8.  ix.  6.  iv.  13. 
V.  8,  27.     Tr.] 

§  93.     Age  of  Hosea. 
Hosea,  ytJ'in,  the  son  of  Beeri,  is  said,  in  the  title  of  the  book 

which  bears  his  name  to  have  been  coeval  with  Uzziah,  Jotham, 
Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  kings  of  Judah,  and  with  Jeroboam  II.,  king  of 
Israel :  the  successors  of  the  last,  who  were  contemporaneous  with 
the  other  princes,  are  not  mentioned.     It  is  impossible  that  Hosea 


OF   THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  327 

could  have  prophesied  during  the  period  of  1 26  years,  comprised  in 
the  joint  reigns  of  these  kings.  If  he  made  his  appearancf  towards 
the  end  of  Jeroboam's  reign,  and  ceased  to  exercise  his  office  in  the 
early  part  of  Hezekiah's,  he  will  have  prophesied  between  fifty-five 
and  sixty  years.  The  title  indeed  has  no  necessary  connexion  with 
the  beginning  of  the  book,  and  therefore  may  have  been  added  by  a 
later  hand  ;  but  whatever  may  be  the  truth  of  the  matter  it  is  cer- 
tainly justified  by  the  contents  of  the  work. [a]  The  Israelitish  nation 
is  here  represented  in  a  state  of  distraction,  as  was  the  case  after  Je- 
roboam's death  ;  for  during  the  subsequent  forty-three  years,  two  in- 
terregna, one  of  twelve  and  the  other  of  nine  years,  took  place  ;  and 
in  the  remaining  twenty-two,  four  kings  were  slain,  the  cruel  Mena- 
hem  reigned  ten  years  and,  although  the  state  of  the  nation  was 
made  completely  military,  was  obliged  to  purchase  freedom  from  op- 
pression by  paying  money  to  the  As>yrians.  Pekah  wasted  the 
strength  of  the  kingdom  by  a  war  against  Judah,  and,  after  being  sub- 
dued by  the  Assyrians,  lost  Galilee  and  Peraea.  At  last,  in  the  reign 
of  Hoshea,  the  kingdom  itself  was  overthrown  by  Salmanasar.  As 
the  prophet  says  nothing  of  this  event,  it  may  be  concluded,  that  he 
had  composed  his  work  before  the  year  722  B.  C,  or  253  after  the 
division.  Comp.  II  Kings  xiv.  23 — xviii.  12.  II  Chron.  xxvi.  1— - 
xxix.  2. 

\a)  Comp.  c.  i.  4,  with  II  Ki.  xv.  10;  c.  v.  13.  vii.  11.  viii.  9.  xii.  2. 
(1.)  xiv.  4.  (3.)  with  II  Ki.  xv.  19.  xvi.  7.  xvii.  4;  c.  vii.  8,  9.  viii.  8. 
with  II  Ki.  XV.  29;  and  c.  x.  6—8.  xiv.  1.  (xiii.  16.)  with  II  Ki. 
xvii.  6.     Tr.] 

§  94.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Hosea. 

Hosea-  as  well  as  Amos,  directed  his  prophecies  principally  against 
the  kingdom  of  Israel.  He  introduces  nothing  which  concerns  the 
fates  of  the  neighbouring  nations,  b  it  meitions  Judah  more  frequently 
than  Amos  does.  See  i.  7.  iv.  15.  v.  5,  10 — 14.  vi.  4,  II.  viii.  14. 
X.  11.  [xi.  12.]  xii.  2.  It  may  be  inferred  therefore  that  he  exercised 
his  office,  not  as  Amos,  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  but  in  that  of  Judah, 

In  the  first  chapter  the  author  presents  four  symbols.  1 )  At  the 
divine  command  he  mbrries  an  incontment  woman.     This  is  an  em- 


328         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

blem  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  the  spouse  of  the  king  Jehovah,  but 
constantly  adulterous,  in  other  words,  idolatrous.  As  the  adulteress 
is  to  be  put  to  death,  so  destruction  threatens  the  kingdom  of  Israel, 

i,  2,  3. 2)  The  first  son  of  this  marriage  is  directed  to  be  called  Jez- 

reel,  '?syiJ''  God  will  scatter  or  destroy,  which  is  an  allusion  to  the 

valley  and  city  of  that  name  where  was  a  royal  pleasure  residence, 
and  also  to  the  name  of  the  kingdom  Sxity*.     It  imphes  that  God  will 

soon  punish  the  royal  house  and  destroy  the  Israelitish  kingdom,  v. 

4,  6. 3)   The  daughter,  who  is  afterwards  born   receives  at  the 

command  of  God  the  name  of  Loruchama,  nom  xS,  site  who  finds  no 

mercy,  and  is  an  emblem  of  Israel,  who  had  no  further  mercy  to  hope 
for,  implying  that  the  divine  determination  with  respect  to  that  king- 
dom was  irrevocable,  while  Judah  should  experience  deliverance, 
V.  6,  7. 4)  The  third  child,  a  son,  is  named  Lo  Ammi,  "'Dj;  kS,  not 

my  people ;  i.  e.  Israel  shall  cease  to  be  the  pecuhar  people  of  God. 

V.  8,  9. Hereafter  however,  they  shall  again  experience  the  divine 

protection^  again  find  mercy,  again  become  the  people  of  God,  and 
united  with  Judah  constitute  one  people  under  one  Lord,  that  is  to 
say,  after  the  return  from  captivity,  and  in  the  times  of  the  Maccabees, 
ii.  1 — 3  (i.  10,  11.  ii.  1.).  This  is  followed  by  an  annunciation  of 
punishment  against  idolatry,  and  against  alliances  with  the  Assyrians 
and  Egyptians  ;  (both  of  which  offences  are  represented  as  a  want  of 
conjugal  fidelity  towards  Jehovah  ;)  of  the  destruction  of  the  capital, 
the  devastation  of  the  country  and  the  removal  of  the  inhabitants  ; 
accompanied  by  a  prospective  view  of  their  return,  their  perseverance 
in  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  their  enjoyment  of  a  happy  future  ;  v. 

4 — 26.  (2 — 23.) Thus  the  second  chapter  explains  the  symbols 

of  the  first. 

In  the  third  chapter  the  prophet  espouses  another  incontinent  fe- 
male, under  the  condition  of  her  havmg  no  connexion  either  with  any 
other  man  or  with  himself  This  symbol  portends  the  long  and  te- 
dious exile,  when  the  ten  tribes,  although  abominating  idolatry,  should 
nevertheless  fail  to  enjoy  the  divine  benevolence  ;  but  at  length  should 
seek  God  and  their  king  David,  that  is,  the  Messiah.  It  does  not  re- 
fer to  the  captivity  of  the  ten  tribes,  which  had  been  represented  in 


Ob    THK    OLD    TESTAMENT.  329 

tlie  first  chapter,  as  the  return  iVom  this  captivity  had  been  in  the  se- 
cond ;  especially  as  the  Israelites  in  this  exile  did  not  abandon  the 
service  of  idols,  but,  to  say  the  least,  associated  them  with  Jehovah 
in  divine  worship,  for  which  they  are  upbraided  by  Jeremiah,  see  iii. 
6,  7.  Hosea  must  therefore  have  in  view  a  remote  futurity,  seen  at 
a  distance  and  obscurely.  It  is  the  present  state  of  the  Jews  to 
which  he  refers :  they  are  not  idolatrous,  and  yet  they  do  not  experi- 
ence the  kindness  of  the  spouse  and  king  of  their  nation  :  hereafter, 
however,  they  vidll  seek  God  and  David's  great  descendant,  Jesus,  as 
the  apostle  Paul  declares  in  Rom.  xi.  24,  25. 

The  remaining  eleven  chapters  ought  to  have  been  divided  into 
nine  ;  for  the  fifth  is  connected  with  the  sixth,  and  the  thirteenth  with 
the  fourteenth.  They  contain  reproofs  of  the  idolatry  and  sedition  of 
the  kingdom  of  Israel ;  and  of  other  crimes  usually  predominant  in 
a  state  distracted  by  tumults,  such  as  lying  and  perjury,  by  which  a 
succession  of  kings  were  constantly  deceived  and  ruined,  homicides, 
thefts,  robberies,  fornications  and  adulteries.  Exhortations  to  refor- 
mation are  every  where  interspersed  ;  and  the  people  are  represented 
as  beginning  to  prepare  themselves  for  it,  but  through  inconstancy  re- 
lapsing into  a  state  even  worse  than  before,  vi — vii.  2.  The  prophet 
blames  the  alliances,  so  little  in  harmony  with  each  other,  which  they 
were  forming,  now  with  the  Egyptians,  now  with  the  Assyrians. 

The  prophecies  which  this  portion  contains,  relate  to  the  same 
events  as  are  predicted  iii  the  first  and  second  chapters.  1)  The 
overthrow  of  the  kingdom  and  the  devastation  of  the  country  ;  iv.  5. 
V.  8,  9.  ix.  6.  X.  7,  8.  xi.  6,  8.  xiii.  8,  15.  xiv.  1.  (xiii.  16.)  Comp. 
i.  4 — 7.  ii.  14 — 16.  (12 — 14.)  The  desolation  of  the  cities  of  Judah 
is  also  threatened,  viii.  14. 2)  The  transportation  of  the  inhabi- 
tants ;  iv.  16.  ix.  3,  17.  xi.  6,  6.  xiii.  3.  Comp.  i.  8,  9.  ii.  15,  16. 
(13,  14.) 3)  The  return  and  steadfast  adherence  to  the  true  wor- 
ship of  God  ;  an  event  200  years  posterior  to  the  time  of  the  prophet ; 
xiv.  5—9.  Comp.  ii.  17—25.  [15—23.] 

§  95.     Style  of  Hosea. 

The  first  and  third  chapters,  in  which  the  symbols  already  men- 
tioned are  described,  are  written  in  prose.  All  the  remainder  of  the 
book  is  poetical,  although  the  parallelism  is  not  always  carefully  pre- 

42 


330        PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

served.  The  style,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  places,  is  little  more 
vehement  and  sublime  than  that  of  Amos  ;  but  Hosea,  as  Jerome  has 
observed,  is  abrupt  and  speaks  in  short  sentences.*  Tropes,  com- 
parisons, and  figures,  which  are  frequent,  are  presented  in  few  words  ; 
and  this  sometimes  produces  a  want  of  perspicuity,  [a]  The  words 
and  phrases  are  not  far-fetched ;  yet  some  occur  which  are  rather 
unusual,  as  hy  in  vii.  16.  xi.  7.  in  the  sense  of  eminence.     Comp.  Isa. 

lix.  18.  Ixiii.  7.  Some  places,  perhaps,  are  erroneous,  as  x.  9., 
where  mbjr  seems  to  be  a  corruption  for  nSljr,  as  it  is  correctly  read 

inx.  13.  [J] 

[a)  EieHHORN,  4.  B.  s.  286,  describes,  and  at  the  same  time  imitates, 
the  style  of  Hosea  in  the  following  passage.  "  The  elocution  of  the  pro- 
phet resembles  a  garland  composed  of  a  multiplicity  of  flowers.  Fi- 
gures are  entwined  with  figures ;  comparisons  interwoven  with  compari- 
sons ;  metaphors  strung  on  metaphors.  He  plucks  a  flower  and  throws  it 
down,  in  order  directly  to  pluck  another.  Like  a  bee  he  flies  from  one 
flower-bed  to  another,  that  he  may  suck  his  honey  from  their  varied 
juices.  Naturally  it  follows  that  his  figures  sometimes  form  strings  of 
pearls ;  often  he  is  forced  to  approach  to  allegory  ;  often  he  sinks  down  in 

obscurity." Eichh.  S.  290,  and  De  Wette,  S.  313,  remark   that 

the  language  of  Hosea  is  original  and  difiicult  in  its  construction,  and  con- 
tains many  uncommon  words  and  forms.  The  whole  of  Eichhorn's  re- 
marks on  this  subject  are  well  worth  perusal.     TV.] 

[6)  EiCHHORN  (Einleit.  §  554.  S.  273.)  concludes  from  c.  xiv.  10.  (9) 
that  Hosea  probably  published  the  book  himself.  De  Wette  (Einleit. 
§  229)  agrees  in  the  supposition,  and  further  contends  that  it  is  supported 
by  the  arrangement  of  the  book.  This  he  supposes  to  be  chronological ; 
c.  i.  7.  relating  to  the  time  immediately  subsequent  to  the  murder  of 
Zachariah ;  c.  v.  13.  vii.  9.  to  the  history  of  Pekah  and  Ahaz,  and  c.  xiv. 
1.  (xiii.  16.)  to  the  approaching  destruction  of  Samaria.     TV.] 

§  96.     Of  Micdli  and  his  Age. 

in  the  title  of  the  book,  Micah,  T\yn,  is  called  the  Morasthite, 
*i"^K''i?3n,  in  order  to  distinguish  him  from  Micaiah,  the  son  of  Imlah, 
who  prophesied  897  years  B.  C.  and  78  after  the  division  ;  I  Kings 

*  Commaticus  est,  et  quasi  per  sententias  loquitur.    Prolog,  in  proph.  xii  min. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  331 

sxii.  8 — 28,  This  surname  is  not  gentilitious,  but  is  applied  to  the 
prophet  from  the  place  of  his  nativity,  Moresheth  Gath,  m  nty"iD  c.  i. 

14.,  or  rather,  Maresha,  r\mD  i.   15.  Jos.  xv.  44.  II  Chron.  xi.  8. 

xiv.  9,  10.,  a  city  belonging  to  the  tribe  of  Judah,  situated  in  the  val- 
ley of  Zephata. 

The  title,  which,  unlike  that  of  Hosea,  is  closely  connected  with 
the  beginning  of  the  book,  certifies  that  Micah  prophesied  under  Jo- 
tham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiah,  whose  reigns  extended  from  the  year  759 
to  699  B.  C.  and  from  216  to  276  after  the  division,  [a]  He  began, 
therefore,  to  exercise  his  office  almost  thirty  years  later  than  Hosea, 
and  was  contemporaneous  with  the  latter  years  of  his  ministry.  Mi- 
cah also,  as  well  as  that  prophet,  appears  to  have  published  his  book 
before  the  sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  722  B.  C,  253  after  the  division, 
when  the  kingdom  of  Israel  was  overturned  ;  for  he  constantly  speaks 
of  that  lamentable  event  as  future. 

The  genuineness  of  his  prophecies  relating  to  the  complete  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem  and  of  the  temple,  is  supported  by  the  testi- 
mony of  Jer.  xxvi.  18,  19, 

[a)  De  Wette  places  his  prophetic  ministry  in  the  last  years  of  Ahaz 
and  the  first  of  Hezekiah.  Einleit.  §  238.     TV.] 

§  97.     Contents  of  the  Boole  of  Micah. 

Micah  directs  his  prophecies,  as  the  title  shows,  against  both  Israel 
and  Judah.  The  first  five  chapters  constitute  one  complete  whole, 
exhibiting  the  fates  of  both  nations  almost  in  chronological  order  ; 
the  two  last  form  another  and  distinct  part  of  the  work. 

The  first  part  may  be  subdivided  into  four  others,  as  follows. 

I.  The  first  chapter  announces  the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of 
Israel,  the  desolation  of  Samaria,  and  the  removal  of  the  inhabitants, 
first  in  figurative  language,  v.  3,  4,  and  then  in  plain  terms,  6,  7.  with 
the  addition  of  many  circumstances  in  relation  to  which  history  affords 
no  evidence. 

II.  In  the  second  chapter  the  author  proceeds  to  describe  those 
€vils,  and  the  causes  of  them,  1 — 5.  He  censures  those  who  wished 
to  put  a  restraint  upon  the  prophet,  or,  at  least,  to  hear  no  other 


332         I'AKTICULAK    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH    BOOK 

j)redictions  than  those  of  a  happy  ftiture,  6 — 13.  In  opposition  to 
these  he  foretells  the  carrying  away  of  the  people,  10  ;  announces  in 
the  third  chapter  the  punishment  of  their  crimes,  1 — 4  ;  threatens  the 
false  prophets  who  promise  happiness,  5 — 8  ;  complains  of  the 
princes,  the  priests  and  the  prophets,  and  predicts  the  desolation  of 
Zion  and  Jerusalem,  9 — 12. 

III.  The  fourth  chapter  looks  forward  to  a  more  remote  future, 
when  the  temple  mount  should  become  greatly  celebrated,  a  house 
of  God  which  the  Gentiles  should  frequent ;  when  a  considerable 
period  of  time,  during  which  no  great  revolutions  took  place  in  Asia, 
is  depicted  as  a  golden  age,  when  the  Hebrews  shall  return  to  their 
country,  and  become  a  powerful  people  under  the  government  of  Je- 
hovah their  king,  1 — 8.  Again  the  prophet  has  a  view  of  the  de- 
struction of  Jerusalem,  the  captivity  of  the  Jews,  and  the  future  pun- 
ishment of  their  enemies,  the  Chaldeans  ;  he  perceives  the  glorious 
victories  of  the  Maccabees,  and  the  slaughter  of  their  Syro-Macedo  • 
nian  enemies,  9 — 13.  The  intervals  of  time  which  sepai'ated  these 
great  events  from  each  other,  and  the  different  enemies  of  the  He- 
brews, viz.  Chaldeans  and  Greeks  in  Syria,  the  prophet  does  not  dis- 
criminate. He  places  them  near  each  othei-,  as  they  appeared  to  his 
eye  in  the  remote  perspective. 

IV.  The  fifth  chapter  declares  that  out  of  Bethlehem  a  ruler  over  Is- 
rael, of  the  family  of  David,  should  arise,  but  not  until  the  Hebrews 
had  suffered  great  calamities,  and  for  some  time  had  been  given  up  into 
the  power  of  theii-  enemies.  But  in  those  times  of  oppression,  (the 
times  of  the  Maccabees,)  there  shall  be  no  want  of  commanders  to 
oppose  the  Assyrians,  and  to  lay  waste  the  land  of  Nimrod ;  by  which 
is  meant,  the  Syrians  and  their  country.  See  Zech.  x.  11.,  who  ap- 
plies the  same  word  to  the  Syrians.  The  prophet  connects  to- 
gether, according  to  the  perspective  view  which  he  had  taken  of 
events,  the  times  of  the  great  descendant  of  David  and  those  of  the 
Maccabees,  1 — 6.  In  the  latter  the  Hebrews  will  be  numerous  and 
formidable,  6 — 8,  (7 — 9.).  Hereupon  the  prophet  views  again  the 
peaceful  times  under  the  Persian  monarchy,  when  idolatry  shall  be 
exterminated,  9 — 13.  (10 — 14.),  and  once  more  touches  on  thf 
destruction  of  the  Macedonians  in  Syria,  14.  (15.). 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  333 

The  second  part  of  the  prophecy  commences  with  a  fine  defence 
of  God's  government  against  the  unrighteous  complaints  of  the  He- 
brews. It  is  in  the  form  of  a  judicial  examination,  in  which  the 
mountains  are  summoned  as  witnesses  of  all  God's  former  benefits 
and  of  his  reasonable  requisitions,  vi.  1 — 8.  Then  the  prophet  re- 
proves the  prevailing  vices,  for  the  punishment  uf  which  Judea  is  to  be 
laid  waste,  9 — 16.  He  goes  on  to  upbraid  the  nation  for  their  immo- 
rality, vii.  1 — 6  ;  and  then  introduces  the  state  under  the  figure  of  a 
matron,  aflirming  her  resolution  to  bear  with  patience  the  punish- 
ment v/hich  is  inflicted  on  her,  and  to  hope  for  a  happy  deliverance 
and  the  destruction  of  her  enemies,  7 — 10.  To  this  resolution  the 
response  is  returned,  that  Jerusalem  shall  hereafter  be  restored,  and 
the  Hebrews  return  to  their  land,  11 — 13.  The  prophet  then  im- 
plores the  accomplishment  of  this  prorai&c,  God  renews  and  confirms 
it,  and  the  prophet  bursts  out  into  thanksgiving,  14 — 20. 

The  most  remarkable  prophecies  which  this  book  contains  are  the 
following  :  1 )  The  overthroio  not  only  of  the  kingdc?n  of  Israel  whicli 
was  near  at  hand,  but  also  of  Judah  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem', 

iii.  12    vii.  13. 2)    The  carrying  away  of  the  Jews  to  Babylonia, 

iv.  10,  11.  vii.  7<  8,  13.  This  event  took  place  almost  160  years 
after  Micah's  time,  and  the  Chaldeans,  who  were  to  be  the  instru- 
ments in  effecting  it,  had  not  arisen,  in  the  prophet's  age,  to  any  dis- 
tinction  among    the  nations. 3)     The  return  from   exile,    the 

restoration  of  Jerusalem,  the  rebuilding  of  the  temple  its  celebrity,  the 
perseverance  of  the  nation  in  the  worship  of  Jehovah,  and  the  peaceful 
period  under  the  Persian  and  Chrecian  governments  ;  all  of  which  events 
were  from  200  to  500  years  distant  from  the   prophet,  iv.  1 — 8.  vii. 

11,  14 — 17. 4)    The  still  more  remote  wars  of  the  Maccabees, 

iv.  13. 5)    The  restoration  of  the  royal  residence  in  Zion,  iv.  8. 

— ■ — 6)  The  coming  of  a  king  of  the  family  of  David,  from.  Bethle- 
hem, V:  1.  (2.) The  three  last  predictions,  inasmuch  as  they  relate 

to  a  very  remote  period,  are  involved  in  some  degree  of  obscurity. 

§  98.     Style  of  Micah. 

The  language  of  Micah  is  more  sublime  and  vehement  than  either 
that  of  Amos  or  that  of  Hosea.  His  tropes  are  very  beautiful,  and  are 
varied  according  to  the  nature  of  the  subject.     His  declarations  are 


334    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

always  made  with  accuracy  and  perspicuity,  and  his  reproofs  with 
boldness.  Paronomasiee,  which  are  considered  in  the  oriental  lan- 
guages as  great  beauties,[a]  frequently  occur,  e.  g.  c.  i.  5 — 14.  ii.  6. 

iv.  14. Dialogue  is  a  favourite  style  with  Micah,  and,  agreeably  to 

the  usage  of  oriental  writers,  diiFerent  interlocutors  are  introduced 
without  apprizing  the  reader  of  the  change  of  speakers.  Unless, 
therefore,  he  pays  strict  attention,  he  will  often  become  involved 
in  darkness,  where  in  reality  all  is  perfectly  clear.  See  ii.  6 — 12. 
vii.  7—17.  [b] 

[a)  This  is  evident  from  the  Conferences  of  Hariri.  Comp.  also 
LowTH  de  Sac.  Foes.  Heb.  T.  I.  p.  292.  Prael.  XV.  not.  Michaelis  76. 
[Gregory's  Trans,  p.  206.  ed.  Boston,  1815.] 

[6)  De  Wette  (Einleit.  }  259.)  attributes  to  the  style  of  Micab 
more  roundness,  fulness,  and  clearness  of  expression  and  rhythm  than  is 
found  in  Hosea,  whom,  however,  he  resembles  in  his  transitions.  Eich- 
HORN  (Einleit.  §  582.  s.  378.)  considers  him  as  a  poet  capable  of  rival- 
ling Isaiah  in  respect  of  novelty  and  vivacity  of  representation,  of  fine- 
ness of  outline,  and  of  sublimity.     TV.] 

§  99.     Publication  of  the  Book  of  Micah. 

Hartmann  in  liis  new  translation  of  Micah,  (Micha  neu  ubersetz, 
S.  11,  12.)  maintains,  that  Micah  did  not  appear  as  a  prophet  until 
the  time  of  Manasseh,  and  that  the  book  which  bears  his  name  is  a 
compilation  made  during  the  Babylonian  exile  from  different  prophe- 
cies, a  part  only  of  which  were  written  by  Micah.  Consequently,  in 
the  first  chapter  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  which  had  already  taken 
place,  is  merely  clothed  in  a  prophetic  dress  ;  and  in  the  fourth  a 
lamentation  on  account  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  now  ef- 
fected, is  introduced  ;  and  elsewhere  three  fragments  are  incorporated 
into  the  work :  so  that  the  whole  is  a  collection  of  five  different 
prophecies. 

In  order  to  support  liis  views,  this  author  raises  hypotheses  upon 
hypotheses  ;  the  places  which  are  adverse  to  his  system  he  attacks 
with  the  aid  of  dogmatical  conjecture  ;  even  the  testimony  in  Jer. 
xxvi.  10.  he  rejects ;  in  fine,  he  does  not  always  perceive  the  true 

construction  of  the  language. The  whole  book  of  Micah  exactly 

corresponds  with  the  times  of  Jotham,  Ahaz,  and  Hezekiali  -•  which 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  335 

alone  sufficiently  refutes  the  arguments  for  a  more  modern  date  that 
are  drawn  from  the  immoralities  which  it  discloses.  For  Jotham 
tolerated  unlawful  altars,  11  Kings  xv.  35.  II  Chron.  xxvii,  2. ;  Ahaz 
was  an  idolater,  who  even  shut  up  the  temple,  II  Kings  xvi.  1 — 4. 
II  Chron.  xxviii.  2—4,  22 — 26.  Hezekiah  indeed  prohibited  idola- 
try, and  restored  the  worship  of  God  in  the  temple,  II  Kings  xviii. 
3 — 5.  II  Chron.  xxix.  3— xxxi.  21.  But  who  can  beheve  that  all 
his  subjects  and  officers  conformed  immediately  to  the  royal  orders  ? 
In  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  to  which  moreover  the  book  of  Micah  re- 
lates, Pekah,  who  was  obliged  to  yield  Gahlee  and  Gilead  to  the  As- 
syrians, reigned  twenty  years.  These  were  followed  by  nine  years 
of  tumult,  during  which  time  crimes  were  perpetrated  with  impunity. 
At  last  Hosea,  in  whose  person  the  dynasty  ended,  held  the  sceptre 
eleven  years,  before  the  termination  of  which  Micah  published  his 
book.  It  is  therefore  plain,  that  there  was  no  want  of  subjects  of 
reproof  at  this  time,  and  consequently  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  call 
in  the  age  of  Manasseh.[a] 

[ffl)  Hartmann's  objections  to  the  genuineness  of  the  book  of  Micah 
are  well  answered  by  Rosss-mueller,  Schol.  ad  XII.  Proph.  Min. 
Tom.  III.     Tr.] 

§  100.  Isaiah  and  the  time  in  which  he  lived. 
Isaiah,  the  son  of  Amoz,  }M'dn  |3  irT'j/E/',  one  of  the  nobles  of  Jeru- 
salem, [a]  Isa.  vii.  and  xxxvi — xxxix.  II  Ki.  xviii — xx.  was  called  (c. 
vi.  1.),  before  Micah,  namely  in  the  year  in  which  Uzziah  died,  i.  e. 
759  before  Christ,  or  216  after  the  division,  and  exercised  his  pro- 
phetic office  under  Jotham  and  Ahaz,  and  beyond  the  fourteenth 
year  of  Hezekiah,  consequently  at  least  ten  years  longer  than  Micah. 
Whether  the  title  to  this  effect,  c.  i.  1.,  which  is  by  no  means  con- 
nected with  the  commencement  of  the  book,  is  supported  by  fact,  is 
indeed  a  subject  of  doubt.  Isaiah  certainly  had  intercourse  with 
Ahaz,  c.  vii.  and  with  Hezekiah,  c.  xxxvii — xxxix.  comp.  I  Ki.  xviii 
— XX.,  but  concerning  Jotham  there  is  a  total  silence  in  every  part  of 
his  book,  and  there  is  no  prophecy  which  seems  to  indicate  the  time 
of  his  reign.     This  gives  rise  to  a  doubt  whether  in  c.  vi.  1.  onv  Jo' 


336  PARTICULAR  IxNTHODUCTlON  TO  EACH    BOOK 

tliam,  should  not  be  read  instead  of  rflj^j  Uzziah,  so  as  to  place  tiic 

first  piophecy  in  the  year  of  the  death  of  Jotham.  For  immediately 
after,  c.  vii.  1,  mention  is  made  of  Jotham's  successor,  Ahaz,  the 
grandson  of  Uzziah  :  "  in  the  time  of  Ahaz,  the  son  of  Jotham,  the 
son  of  Uzziah  :"  whence  some  one  may  have  concluded  that  Isaiah 
prophesied  also  under  the  reign  of  Uzziah  and  hence  have  been  in- 
duced to  alter  onr,  c.  vi.,  to  n'l;^;  the  rather,  because,  II  Chron. 

xxvi.  22.  Isaiah  is  said  to  have  written  the  history  of  Uzziah.  This 
mistake  once  made,  it  became  necessary  to  add  the  name  of  Uzziah 
to  the  title  in  c.  i.  1  ;  unless,  indeed,  we  suppose  that  he  who 
made  the  latter  took  the  name  of  Uzziah  from  Isa.  vii.  1 .  and  II  Chr. 
xxvi.  22  and  afterwards  interpolated  the  name  of  Uzziah  instead  of 
that  of  Jotham  in  Isa.  vi.  1  .[6]  This  supposition  will  not  appear  strange 
to  any  one  who  knows  that  the  book  of  Isaiah  has  come  down  to  us  by 
no  means  accurately  transcribed  ;  or  has  observed  that  Isaiah  c.  vi, 
does  not,  like  Jeremiah,  pray  to  be  released  from  his  mission  in  conside- 
ration of  his  youth,  but,  on  the  contrary,  offers  himself  to  be  sent,  and 
therefore  must  have  been  at  least  thirty  years  of  age  :  consequently, 
if  the  year  of  his  being  called  had  been  the  last  year  of  Uzziah,  Isaiah 
must  have  been  seventy-eight  years  old  in  the  fourteenth  of  Hezekiah, 
while  yet,  in  Isa.  xxxvi — xxxix.  II  Ki.  xviii — xx,  he  conducts  himself 
in  his  transactions  with  Hezekiah  as  one  still  vigorous  :  and  if  he  lived 
until  after  the  death  of  Hezekiah,  whose  history  he  is  said,  II  Chr. 
xxxii.  32,  to  have  written,  or,  as  the  Jews  maintain,  until  the  reign 
of  Manasseh,  he  could  not  have  been  less  than  ninety-two  or  ninety- 
five  years  old.[c] According  to  the  received  reading,  Isaiah  pro- 
phesied at  least  forty-eight  years,  according  to  that  proposed  at  least 
thirty-two,  but  very  probably  much  longer,  even  to  the  time  of  king 
Manasseh,  under  whose  reign  the  Talmudists  assert  that  he  was  cut 
in  sunder  with  a  saw.  Tliis  account  of  his  death,  if  certain,  would 
tend  to  confirm  the  conjecture,  comp.  II  Ki.  xxi.  10 — 15.  II  Chr. 
xxxiii.  10  ,  which,  moreover,  agrees  well  with  the  complaints' of  the 
prophet  on  account  of  contumelious  treatment,  c.  li.  6.  ss.,  which  he 
might  have  received  under  Amon  or  Manasseh,  but  not  under  Heze- 
kiah. This  time  also  appears  to  be  pointed  out  by  the  reproofs  of 
crimes,  especially  of  idolatry  as  the  most  foolish  of  all  superstition?. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  337 

ot  human  sacrifices,  and  of  wicked  shepherds  or  kings,  which  occa- 
sionally occur ;  all  which  exactly  suit  the  reign  of  Manasseh  :  Isa. 
Ivi.  10.  ss.  Ivii.  1 — 21.  lix.  1 — 19.  Whatever  maybe  the  truth  of 
the  matter,  Isaiah  was  certainly  in  part  contemporary  with  Hosea 
and  Micah,  as  the  agreement  of  the  contents  of  his  book  with  their 
prophecies  proves. [<i] 

[a)  De  Wette  (Einleit.  }  207.  p.  285.)  rejects  tlie  Rabbinical  tradi- 
tion that  Amoz  was  brother  to  Amaziah,  and  calls  the  former  a  person  ot 
unknown  lineage.  He  adds,  that  the  supposition  that  the  influence  of 
Isaiah  with  Hezekiah  was  founded  upon  noble  descent  or  high  office, 
or  upon  anything  else  than  his  own  prophetic  mission  and  the  piety  of 
the  king,  is  both  needless  and  improbable.     TV.]  ^ 

[6)  No  prophecy  of  Jotham's  age  precedes  vi.  1.  Chapters  li— v.  be- 
long to  that  of  Ahaz,  and  yet  it  is  not  likely  that  Isaiah,  if  he  were  called 
to  the  prophetic  office  in  the  last  year  of  Uzziah,  would  have  been  silent 
during  the  whole  sixteen  years  of  Jotham's  reign.  If  this  were  the  case 
therefore,  most  probably  some  predictions  of  that  period  are  lost.  Comp. 
$  103.  III.] 

[c;  This,  however,  as  Bertboldt  remarks,  is  by  no  means  unexam 
pled,  nor  so  improbable  as  to  render  an  alteration  of  the  text  either  ne 
cessary  or  adviseable.     Tr.] 

[d)  Comp.  Isa.  V.  19.  viii.  19 — 21.  xxx.  10.  s.  with  Mic.  ii.  6.  ss. :  Isa 
V.  8.  with  Mic.  ii.  2.]  [Gesenius  remarks  that  c.  vi.  refers  no  doubt  to 
the  original  call  of  Isaiah  to  the  prophetic  office.  Observe  v.  5,  8,  9.  and 
comp.  the  calls  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel  in  the  first  chapters  of  their 
books.  From  an  erroneous  exposition  of  the  title,  c.  i.  1.,  and  from  the 
circumstance  that  the  call  does  not  stand  first  in  the  collection  of  prophe- 
cies, the  opinion  has  arisen,  that  Isaiah  prophesied  during  a  great  part, 
or  rather  the  whole,  of  Uzziah's  reign.  This  has  been  supported  both 
by  Jewish  and  Christian  commentators,  and  among  the  Eastern  Chris- 
tians is  confidently  maintained,  although  it  extends  the  age  of  Isaiah  to 
at  least  130  years.  The  title,  c.  i.  1.  seems  to  belong  to  the  first  book 
only,  i.  e.  to  c.  i — xii.  as  it  cannot  be  said  of  the  first  prophecy,  that  it 
was  announced  under /our  kings,  nor  of  the  whole  collection  that  they 
merely  concern  Judah  and  Jerusalem.  Gesenics  is  disposed  to  adopt 
Jahn's  conjecture,  and  read  Jolham  instead  of  Usziah  in  vi.  1.  See  Ein- 
leit. 5  1.  note  8.  Rosenmdeller  (Scholia  Vol.  I  p.  78.)  does  not  alter 
the  text.  To  the  combined  lengths  of  the  reigns  of  Jotham  and  Ahaz, 
(thirty-one  or  thirty-two  years,)  he  adds  fifteen  years  of  Hezekiah's, 
(comp.  II  Ki.  XX.  1.  with  xviii.  13.)  and  three  or  four  of  Uzziah's,  making 
in  all  fifty  or  rather  more  for  the  exercise  of  Isaiah's  prophetic;  office.  an<J 

43 


338    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

about  eig;hty  or  ninety  for  his  age,  rejecting  of  course  the  account  of  his 
death  given  by  the  Talmudists.  He  does  not  consider  c.  vi.  as  referring 
to  the  prophet's  call.     See  p.  196.     Tr.] 

§  101.     Contents  of  the  book  of  Isaiah. 

[In  reading  Isaiah,  it  is  particularly  necessary  to  distinguish  between 
the  subject  of  which  he  treats  and  the  figurative  and  poetic  colouring 
with  which  he  adorns  it.  Chap.  i.  describes  a  period  when  the  king- 
dom of  Judah  was  sunk  in  gross  immorality,  and  does  not  suit  the 
fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah  and  the  irruption  of  Sennacherib,  to 
which  some  refer  it,  but  rather  an  early  period  of  the  reign  of  Ahaz, 
when  the  country  was  wasted  by  Pekah  and  Rezin,  and  idolatry  per- 
vaded Jei'usalem. 

Chaps,  ii — v.,  are  provided  with  a  new  inscription,  and  the  time 
referred  to  is  the  same  early  period  of  the  reign  of  Ahaz.  The  whole 
section  consists  of  two  parts  ;  the  first  extending  to  the  end  of  c.  iv., 
and  treating  of  the  miseries  and  oppressions  which  the  Jews  were  to 
sustain  from  the  Assyrians.  Comp.  II  Chr.  xxviii.  The  second  part, 
in  c.  v.,  represents  the  same  thing,  first  under  the  figure  of  a  vine- 
yard, and  then  in  proper  language.  The  invasion  of  Sennacherib  is 
here  depicted  in  clearer  terms. 

Chap,  vi.,  represents  the  splendid  inaugural  vision  of  the  last  year 
of  Uzziah  (or,  as  has  been  conjectured,  of  Jotham,)  in  which  the  pro- 
phet is  told  that  his  exhortations  would  be  ineffectual,  and  that  the 
land  would  certainly  become  desolate  and  the  inhabitants  be  removed  : 
only  a  few  remaining  to  serve,  like  the  stump  of  a  felled  oak  or  tere- 
bith,  for  the  future  stock  of  the  nation.  This  evidently  extends  to  all 
the  distresses  even  to  the  time  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  to  the  return 
from  the  captivity  ;  and  it  contains  no  particular  promise  of  a  happy 
future.  See  vi.  13,  and  comp.  x.  20.  s.  This  is  undoubtedly  the 
first  piece,  and  has  obtained  its  present  place  by  chance :  let  the 
reader  only  peruse  it  first,  and  then  c.  i — v.,  and  he  will  be  surprised 
at  the  proper  arrangement  of  the  whole. 

Chap.  vii.  is  partly  historical.  Isaiah  directs  king  Ahaz  not  to  be 
afraid  of  Pekah  and  Rezin,  kings  of  Israel  and  Syria,  who  had  already 
obtained  important  victories,  (see  II  Ki.  xvi.  5 — 8.,  II  Chr.  xxviii. 
n — .19.)  and  not  to  ask  aid  of  the  king  of  Assyria,  because  those  two 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEM .  339 

kingdoms  were  near  their  destruction.  To  confirm  his  promise,  he 
offers  the  king  any  sign  that  he  might  choose  ;  but  finding  no  regard 
paid  to  his  declarations,  he  predicts  the  devastation  of  Judah  by  the 
Assyrians  and  Egyptians,  referring  not  only  to  what  is  mentioned  in 
II  Chr.  xxviii.  20.  s.,  but  to  all  the  oppressions  which  Judah  after- 
wards experienced  from  the  Assyrians  and  Egyptians.  See  Isa.  xx.  1. 
II  Ki.  xviii.  17.  Comp.  Herodotus  II.  157,  and  II  Ki.  xxiii. 
33.  ss. 

The  prophecies  in  c.  viii.  1 — ix.  6,  and  ix.  7 — x.  4,  refer  to  the 
same  time  and  circumstances  as  the  preceding.  In  the  former, 
Isaiah  repeats  the  prediction  of  the  speedy  overthrow  of  Israel  and 
Damascus  (viii.  1 — 4.),  reproves  Judah  and  Israel  for  putting  too 
much  confidence  in  the  Assyrians,  of  whose  oppressions  he  again 
warns  them,  (viii.  5 — 22.  comp.  II  Ki.  xvii.  II  Chr.  xxviii.  20.  s.). 
He  then  announces  happy  times,  which  some  explain  of  Hezekiah's 
age,  others  of  the  Messiah's,  to  whom  ix.  5.  s.  refer.  In  the  latter 
(ix.  7 — X.  4,)  he  reproaches  the  Israehtes  for  the  treaty  which  they 
had  entered  into  with  Damascus,  against  Judah,  and  predicts  to  them 
the  ruin  of  their  own  kingdom.     Comp.  II  Ki.  xvii. 

Chap.  X.  5 — 34.  After  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  (see  u.  11,) 
Isaiah  threatens  the  Jews  with  another  chastisement  from  the  Assy- 
rians, who,  for  their  pride  and  cruelty,  should  be  greatly  weakened 
by  the  ruin  of  Sennacherib's  army.  Afterwards  the  Jews  were  to 
turn  sincerely  to  Jehovah.  The  prophet  is  thus  led  (c.  xi.)  to  pre- 
dict another  glorious  yet  far  distant  deliverance  by  the  great  descend- 
ant of  David,  to  whom  even  the  heathen  were  to  be  converted  ;  a 
happy  state  of  things  which  is  described  as  a  golden  age,  and  refers 
to  that  of  the  Messiah.  A  song  of  thanksgiving  in  c.  xii.  forms  the 
conclusion. 

The  section  in  c.  xiii.  1 — xiv.  23,  is  a  prophecy  of  the  overthrow 
of  the  Chaldean  kingdom  by  the  Medes,  and  of  the  complete  de- 
struction of  Babylon  ;  after  which,  the  Hebrews  were  to  return  from 
the  captivity.     This  also  ends  with  a  song. 

The  fragment  in  c.  xiv.  24 — 27,  predicts  Sennacherib's  destruc- 
tion. The  other  in  v.  28 — 32,  is  directed  against  the  Philistines 
who  had  rejoiced  at  the  death  of  Uzziah  and  recovered  the  cities  which 
he  had  taken  from  them.     Comp.  II  Chr.  xxvi,  G.  w^ith  xxviii.  18, 


340    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

The  prophet  declares  that  they  shall  suffer  greater  calamities,  not 
only  from  another  king,  (Hezekiah,  II  Ki.  xviii.  8,)  but  also  from  the 
Assyrians,  (under  Sennacherib,)  while  Jerusalem  should  be  spared. 
Comp.  Amos  i.  6 — 8. 

Chaps.  XV.  xvi.  contain  a  prophecy  of  a  great  devastation  of  the 
country  of  Moab.  (Comp.  Amos  ii.  1 — 3.)  It  had  been  uttered 
?ome  time  before,  but  now  the  prophet  adds,  that  within  three  years 
it  should  be  accomplished,  when  a  good  king  should  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  Judah.  This  is  no  doubt  Hezekiah,  and  the  devastation 
took  place  under  Salmanassar,  although  not  mentioned  in  the  history 
on  account  of  its  brevity.  The  country  afterwards  recovered  its 
strength.     See  Zeph.  ii.  8.  and  Jer.  xlviii. 

To  the  time  of  Ahaz  belong  chaps,  xvii.  xviii.,  where  Isaiah  pre- 
dicts the  destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Damascus,  and  the  decay  of 
the  Israelitish  state.  See  c.  ix.  and  comp.  Amos  i.  2 — 6,  and  II  Ki. 
XV.  29.  xvi.  9.  The  remnant  of  the  Israelites  will  then  turn  to  Je- 
hovah. This  is  also  spoken  of  by  Hosea,  c.  vi.,  although  he  describes 
tlie  conversion  as  imperfect  and  unsteady.  The  Jews  are  threatened 
with  an  immediate  calamity  in  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib,  against 
whom  the  Cushites  in  alliance  with  the  Egyptians  will  arise  ;  unne- 
cessarily, however,  since  God  himself  will  humble  the  Assyrians. 
Comp.  II  Ki.  xviii.  xix.  II  Chr.  xxxii.  Isa.  xxxvi.  xxxvii.  Herod. 
II.  170.,  and  Archffiologie  II.  Th.  I.  B.  §  41.  S.  190.  ff. 

Chap.  xix.  predicts  the  state  of  anarchy  which  lasted  two  years  in 
Egypt,  after  the  death  of  Sethos,  the  contemporary  of  Sennacherib, 
which  was  followed  by  the  government  of  the  twelve  princes.  In  the 
end  Psammetichus  obtained  the  kingdom.  See  Diodorus  Siculus,  I. 
Ixvi.  Herodotus,  II.  147, 151, 162.  The  miseries  occasioned  by  the 
anarchy,  (which  took  place  during  the  first  years  of  Manasseh's  reign,) 
Avere  increased  by  the  failure  of  the  Nile  to  overflow  its  banks. 

Chap.  XX.  refers  to  a  period  not  long  before  the  invasion  of  Sen- 
nacherib, when  Tartan  is  sent  to  Jerusalem  by  that  monarch,  (II  Ki. 
xviii.  17,).  The  text  calls  him  Sargon,  which  can  hardly  be  ex- 
plained of  any  other  than  Sennacherib.  Ashdod  or  Azotus,  which  is 
taken  by  Tartan,  was  a  conquest  of  Uzziah's  from  the  Philistines, 
lost  in  the  reign  of  Ahaz,  and  again  taken  from  Sennacherib  by  He- 
zekiah.     Comp.  II  Chr.  xxvi.  6.  xxviii.  18.   II  Ki.  xviii.  8.      After 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  341 

its  conquest  by  Tartan,  it  was  attacked  by  Psammetichus  and  taken 
in  the  time  of  Manasseh  after  a  siege  of  twenty- nine  years.  In  order 
to  represent  to  the  Hebrews  the  vanity  of  their  confidence  in  Egypt, 
Isaiah  goes  three  years  barefoot  and  without  his  upper  garment,  to 
indicate  that  the  Ethiopians,  who,  becoming  lords  of  the  Egyptians, 
wished  to  relieve  Ashdod,  should  be  led  away  naked  and  barefoot  to 
prison  by  the  Assyrians. 

In  Chap.  xxi.  the  prophet  sees  (u.  1 — 10.)  the  conquest  of  Baby- 
lon by  the  Medes  and  Elamites,  (Persians,)  The  subsequent  frag- 
ment (v.  11.  s.)  concerning  Dumah,  (a  race  of  Arabians  descended 
from  a  son  of  Ishmael,  Gen.  xxv.  14.,  or  a  city  in  Arabia,)  and  the 
next,  (».  13 — 15,)  concerning  the  dangers  to  which  the  caravans  of 
Dedan  would  be  subjected,  have  no  connexion  with  this  vision. 

Chap.  xxii.  1 — 14,  contains  a  prophecy  of  the  state  of  Jerusalem 
when  Sennacherib  demanded  its  submission  ;  and  of  the  fall  of  the 
prime  minister  Shebna-  and  the  appointment  of  Eliakim  in  his  place, 
(v.  15 — 25.)  In  c.  xxiii.  the  destruction  of  Tyre  by  the  Chaldeans 
is  predicted. 

The  difficult  section  in  chaps,  xxiv — xxvii.  is  applied  by  Grotius 
to  Salmanassar,  by  Hensler  to  Sennacherib,  by  Dathe  to  Nebu- 
chadnezzar and  to  the  destruction  of  Babylon,  and  by  Vitringa  to 
the  Maccabees.  It  corresponds  best  with  the  devastations  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar and  the  fall  of  Babylon  ;  and  probably  it  glances  occa- 
sionally at  the  times  of  the  Maccabees,  as  can  hardly  be  denied 
of  c.  xxvii. 

Chaps,  xxviii — xxxii.  seem  also  to  constitute  one  whole.  Isaiah 
laments  the  approaching  ruin  of  Israel  (xxviii.  1 — 4.),  and  promises 
happiness  to  the  Jews  after  they  should  be  delivered  from  the  dan- 
gers with  which  they  were  threatened  by  the  impending  invasion  of 
Sennacherib.  He  reproaches  (xxix.  9 — 24.)  the  false  prophets  with 
their  blindness,  and  proceeds  (xxx.  xxxi.)  in  the  same  tone  to  up- 
braid the  Jews  with  want  of  faith,  and  with  their  alliances  with 
Egypt,  which  were  useless,  as  God  himself  would  deliver  them  from 
the  Assyrians.  The  discourse  is  interrupted  in  xxxii.  1 — 8.  by  a  de- 
scription of  Hezekiah's  reign. 

Chap,  xxxiii.  predicts  deliverance  from  Sennacherib's  devastations, 
at  the  very  time  when  he  was  in  the  country. 


342  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

Chap,  xxxiv.  announces  chastisement  to  all  people,  (in  the  vicinity 
of  Judea,)  and  was  accomplished  in  part  by  Sennacherib  and  in  part 
by  Salmanassar. 

Chap.  XXXV.  promises  to  the  wasted  country  better  times,  when 
those  who  had  fled  away  should  return,  and  the  truth  of  these  pre- 
dictions be  acknowledged. 

The  next  four  chapters  (xxxvi — xxxix.)  are  in  part  historical. 
They  treat,  1)  of  ■Sennacherib's  invasion  and  destruction,  and  some 
prophecies  relating  to  that  event  are  introduced  ;  2)  of  Hezekiah's 
sickness  and  extraordinary  recovery,  as  announced  by  Isaiah,  and 
confirmed  by  a  miracle,  (comp.  II  Ki.  xviii.  13 — xx.  11.),  which  is 
perpetuated  by  a  song  of  praise  ;  3)  of  the  embassy  of  the  king  of 
Babylon  which  leads  to  Isaiah's  prediction  of  the  captivity.  Comp. 
II  Chr.  xxxii.   II  Ki.  xx.  12—19. 

Although  the  second  part  of  the  work  xl — Ixvi.  is  certainly  one 
connected  whole,  several  divisions  are  observable.  Thus  the  section 
in  xl — lii.  12,  treats  of  the  overthrow  of  the  Babylonian  kingdom, 
(see  xliii.  14.  xlvii.  1 — 15.  xlviii.  14,  20,  and  comp.  xiii.  1 — 14. 
xxiii,)  by  an  eastern  hero  coming  from  the  North  (xli.  1 — 6,  26.  xlv. 
13,)  Cyrus  by  name,  who  should  cause  the  scattered  Hebrews  to  re 
turn  to  their  own  land,  and  their  city  and  temple  to  be  rebuilt,  (xliv. 
28.  xlv.  1  ).  This  restoration  is  continually  floating  before  the  eye 
of  the  prophet,  although  here  and  there  he  extends  his  vision  to  a 
more  remote  future,  which  he  presents  (and  this  can  hardly  be  too 
often  repeated,)  in  perspective  view  ;  as  bordering  close  upon  the 
return.*  Thus  he  introduces  the  times  of  the  Maccabees  (xlix.  20 — 
26.  xli.  15.  s.  comp.  Mic.  iv.  13,);  the  extension  of  the  knowledge 
of  God,  (xliv.  4.  s.,  9.  xlv.  14.  ss  23.  s  ).  With  these  views  he  con- 
soles the  desponding  people  (xl.  27 — 31.  xlix.  14.  ss.),  frequently 
assuring  them  that  the  promises  should  be  accomplished,  and  from  the 
fulfilment  of  past  predictions  strengthening  their  confidence  in  those 
which  still  remained  to  be  verified,  and  proving  that  Jehovah  is  the 
true  and  only  God. 

The  section  in  lii.  13 — Ivi.  8,  treats  of  the  Messiah  and  of  the  ex- 
tension of  true  religion,  both  before  and  after  his  coming.     In  lii.  1 3 

*  [See  ^  81  of  this  part.     TV.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  343 

— liii.  12,  Jfisus  is  certainly  represented.  All  other  expositions,  of 
Cyrus,  of  Isaiah,  of  Jeremiah  or  any  other  prophet,  of  the  better 
part  of  the  nation,  or  of  the  whole  nation,  are  extremely  forced.  It 
is  worth  while  to  compare  with  this,  c.  xlii.  1  ss  Chap.  Iv.  1 — 5, 
also  does  undoubtedly  speak  of  the  Messiah.  The  perseverance 
of  the  Hebrews  in  the  true  religion  after  their  return  from  the  cap- 
tivity is  very  clearly  represented  in  hv.  13,  and  the  extension  of  reli- 
gion in  liv — Ivi. 

The  prophet's  tone  changes  with  the  ninth  verse  of  c.  Ivi. ,  and  he 
begins  to  reprove  the  wickedness  of  the  shepherds,  (meaning  not 
teachers  or  priests,  who  are  never  called  shepherds  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, but  kings,)  and  of  the  false  prophets.  Although  he  returns  to 
his  former  consolatory  manner  in  Ivii.  18  ss.,  yet  he  renews  his 
reproofs  of  hypocrisy  and  vice,  c  Iviii.,  with  promises  of  various  bless- 
ings on  condition  of  sincere  conversion.  This  extends  to  the  end  of 
c.  Ixii.,  and  refers  in  part  to  the  Maccabean  times,  as  the  blood 
stained  hero  seen  by  the  prophet  coming  up  from  Edom  (Ixiii.  1 — 6,) 
is  certainly  a  figure  of  the  Maccabees  conquering  their  enemies  with- 
out the  aid  of  allies. 

Immediately  there  follows  (Ixiii  7 — lxiv.l2.)  a  song  of  thanks- 
giving, which  insensibly  changes  into  a  prayer  that  God  would  pity 
the  miserable  state  of  the  Hebrews,  whose  cities  were  destroyed, 
whose  capital  was  devastated,  and  whose  temple  was  burnt.  Goi> 
answers  in  Ixv.  1 — Ixvi.  24,  that  although  he  has  punished  the  people 
for  their  sins,  he  has  not  exterminated  them  ;  that  the  better  part 
shall  return  and  be  happy,  while  the  wicked  shall  be  destroyed  ;  that 
a  state  of  things  altogether  new  shall  take  place,  which  is  depicted  in 
strong  colours  as  a  golden  age,  (Ixv.  17.  ss.).  Chap.  Ixvi.  declares 
God's  determination  to  punish  hypocrites,  idolaters,  and  apostates, 
■while  Zion  shall  be  blessed  with  inhabitants.  All  nations  shall 
acknowledge  God,  and  the  Jews  wherever  dispersed  shall  return. 
This  is  undoubtedly  the  return  from  the  captivity,  but  it  refers  in  part 
to  the  Maccabean  times,  when  apostate  Jews  drove  out  their  pious 
brethren  (Ixvi.  5.),  and  at  last  were  themselves  destroyed.  And 
after  repeated  perusals  of  this  portion,  it  always  appears  to  me,  that 
the  similar  times  of  the  apostles  and  of  the  last  punishment  of  the 


344  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

Jews  by  Titus  are  also  here  in  the  picture  represented  in  per^ 
apective.] 

The  principal  predictions  contained  in  the  whole  book  are  these  ; 
1)  The  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which  happened  in  the 
sixth  year  of  Hezekiah,  but  undoubtedly  had  been  predicted  long  be- 
fore by  Isaiah,  as  it  had  been  also  by  Micah,  Hosea,  and  Amos.  2) 
The  expedition  of  Sennacherib  against  Egypt,  the  devastation  of  Judea, 
the  summons  to  surrender  made  to  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem-  the 
remarkable  destruction  of  his  army,  his  return  to  the  city  of  Nineveh, 
and  his  death.  Comp.  Mic.  i.  9<  12.  s.  The  prophet  throughout 
foresees  and  sketches  all  the  evils  which  the  kingdom  of  Judah  suf- 
fered from  Tiglath-pileser,  Salmanasar,  and  Sennacherib.  3)  The  Ba- 
bylonian captivity  and  universal  devastation  of  Judea  :  comp.  Mic.  iii. 
12.  iv  9 — 11.  vii.  7  s.  13,  and  Amos  ii.  5.  4)  The  fate  of  Philistia, 
Moab,  Tyre,  Damascus,  Idumea,  and  Egypt;  and  especially  the 
overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Chaldeans,  and  of  Babylon.  5)  The 
return  of  the  Hebrews  from  captivity,  the  restoration  (f  Jerusalem  and 
the  temple,  the  friendly  connexion  of  Israel  with  Judah,  the  subse- 
quently settled  worship  of  God,  the  propagation  of  religion,  and  the 
times  of  the  Maccabees:  comp.  Mic.  iv.  1 — 12.  v.  4 — 8.  vii.  11,  14, 
17.  Hos.  ii.  1—3,  5,  9,  15—25.  xi.  9—11.  xiv.  9.  and  Amos  ix.  14. 
6)  The  Messiah:  c.  Iii.  13— liii.  12.  xi.  1—10.  Iv.  1—5.  The  servant 
of  God,  whom  the  prophet  frequently  introduces  in  his  second  part,  is 
not  always  the  Messiah  but  sometimes  the  Hebrew  nation,  sometimes 
the  prophet  himself,  yet  never  Cyrus,  who  is  called  either  the  righteous, 
that  is,  the  conqueror,  as  xli.  1 — 3,  or  the  shepherd,  and  anointed,  that 
is,  the  king,  as  xhv.  28.  xlv.  1. 

§  102.     The  style  of  Isaiah. 

Isaiah  far  excels  all  the  other  prophets  in  elegance  and  suWimity, 
and  nearly  equals,  especially  in  particular  parts,  as  c.  xiii.  1 — xiv  23, 
the  songs  of  Moses  and  the  poem  of  Job.  The  propriety  of  his  me- 
thod is  not  less  remarkable  than  the  elegance  of  his  style.  His 
images  are  accurately  dehneated,  and  if  they  occur  frequently,  as,  for 
instance,  that  of  the  golden  age,  are  depicted  in  varied  colours.  His 
language  is  remarkably  pure.     His  style  is  vehement,  and  varies  a<> 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  346 

cording  to  the  nature  of  the  subject,  remarkable  euphony  of  language 
being  sometimes  discoverable,  and,  occasionally,  a  similarity  of  ca 
dence  forming  a  sort  of  rhyme.     The  resemblance  of  the  style  oi' 
Isaiah  to  that  of  his  contemporary  Micah  is  worthy  of  observation 

§  103.     Are  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  entire  Y 

That  all  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  have  not  been  preserved,  is  plain  , 
1)  from  the  fact  that  we  nowhere  read  what  was  the  occasion  of  the 
prophetic  name  312'''  ^XK'^  "  the  remnant  shall  return,''''   of  Isaiah's 

first  born  son,  who  is  mentioned  or  referred  to  in  c.  vii.  3.  viii.  18.  x. 
21.  s.,  although  the  reason  for  the  appellation  of  his  second  son, 
«D  wr\  SSty  ina,  •■'^  hasten  spoil,  come  quickly  plunder,''^  is  expressly 

given,  viii.  3.  s. 2)  Many  passages  want  a  beginning  or  an  end- 

ing,  and  are  mere  fragments,  as  xiv.  24 — 27,  28 — 32.  xxi.  11.  s.  IS 
— 17  :  and  in  the  end  of  c.  v.  and  in  viii.  1.  s.  something  appears  to 

be  wanting. 3)  If  Isaiah  commenced  his  prophetic  office   in  the 

last  year  of  Uzziah,  the  prophecies  that  he  published  under  Jotham 
are  lost ;  for  those  contained  in  c.  ii — v.  were  published,  not  under  Jo- 
tham, but  under  Ahaz,  as  must  be  evident  to  every  reader  acquainted 
with  the  history  of  the  times  ;  and  nothing  is  proved  in  contradiction  to 

this  by  RosENMUELLER  in  the  last  edition  of  his  Scholia. 4)  If  Isaiah 

is  the  author  of  the  second  part,  as  I  shall  hereafter  prove,  there  seems 
to  be  wanting  some  more  perspicuous  prophecies  concerning  the  over- 
throw of  the  Jewish  state,  and  the  carrying  away  of  the  inhabitants. 
The  beginning  of  c.  xl.  seems  to  be  wanting  ;  I  know  that  a  writer  may 
be  hurried  at  once  into  the  midst  of  his  subject ;  but,  in  the  present  case, 
this  principle  does  not  meet  the  difficulty,  especially  as  the  prophet 
here  as  in  xU.  6,21,  uses  the  uncommon  formula  mri''  IDV,  ^^  the 

Lord  WILL  say,"  which  seems  to  show  that  something  must  have  gone 
before,  determining  the  time  in  which  he  would  say. 

§  104.     All  the  Prophecies  are  Isaiali's. 

During  the  last  thirty  years  not  a  few  of  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
have  been  attacked  by  numerous  writers.  All  those  which  are  ut- 
tered against  the  Gentiles,  but  especially  the  last  twenty-seven  chap- 

44 


34b         PAKTICULAK     IISTKODUCI  IO.\    TO    EaCH    BOOK 

ters,  have  been  denied  to  belong  to  this  prophet,  and  arguments  ot 
no  small  weight  have  been  brought  to  show  that  they  first  originated 
during  the  Babylonian  captivity,  [a]  These,  however,  after  frequently 
repeated  and  diligent  examination,  appear  not  at  all  satisfactory,  and, 
on  the  contrary,  weighty  arguments  in  proof  of  the  genuineness  of 
these  prophecies  present  themselves.     These  shall  be  stated. 

I.  The  style  differs  scarcely  any  in  the  different  prophecies.  We 
find  every  where  the  same  descriptions  of  particular  objects,  and  the 
same  images,  taken  from  trees,  especially  cedars,  firs,  and  oaks  ;  from 
the  pains  of  childbirth,  from  history,  and  from  the  golden  age.  The 
beginning  of  the  prophecy  constantly  enters  into  the  midst  of  the  sub- 
ject, and  every  where  poetical  passages  are  inserted  ;  as  v.  1 — 6.  xii. 
1 — 6.  xiv.  4 — 20.  XXV.  1 — 6  ;  so,  exactly  in  the  same  manner,  xlii. 
10 — 13.  lii.  9.  s.  Ixi.  10.  Ixiii.  7.  Ixiv.  11.  Every  where  the  same 
clearness  and  obscurity,  the  same  repetitions,  and  the  same  euphony 
of  language,  are  observable.  The  visions  are  similar  ;  comp.  c.  xxi. 
and  c.  xl.  with  c.  vi.  Even  the  same  phrases  occur  repeatedly  :  e.  g. 
'yx'iii''  tynp  occurs  in  the  first  part  seventeen  times,  in  the  second^ 

twelve  times,  -inin,  which  occurs  in  all  the  rest  of  the  Bible  only 
nine  times,  is  found  in  the  first  part  of  Isaiah/owr  times,  in  the  se- 
cond, six.     D'X^fNV,  which  is  elsewhere  only  to  be  met  with  fcmr 

times  in  the  book  of  Job,  is  found  here  twice  in  the  first  part,  andj/iue 
times  in  the  second,     pnty  is  used  in  Ixv.  10.  just  as  in  xxxiii.  9.  xxv. 

2  :  r\i7V  IDK',  in  xl.  1.  xh.  7,  21.  Ixvi.  9,  just  as  in  i.  11,  18.  xxxiii. 

10,  instead  of  which  the  other  prophets  say  nm"'  IDK,  or  iDJfl.     The 

expressions  applied  to  the  Sabaeans,  ^tJ'DD,  stretched  out,  or  tall,  xviii. 

2,  7.,  and  mn  ''B'JK,  Toen  of  measure,  or  tall  men,  are  peculiar  to  our 

prophet,  as  well  as  many  others,  which  I  have  not  room  here  to  spe- 
cify.  The  sublimity  of  the  style  does  not  vary  more  throughout  all 

the  prophecies,  than  is  usual  in  poems  which  are  written  by  the  same 
author  at  difierent  times,  as,  for  example,  the  different  psalms  of  Da- 
vid ;  and  the  style  in  all,  is  such  as  could  by  no  means  be  expected 
from  writers  of  the  age  of  the  Babylonian  captivity.  It  is  granted 
that  style  does  not  depend  entirely  upon  the  age,  but  in  some  mea- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  347 

sure  upon  the  cultivated  genius  of  the  writer  ;  yet  it  does  not  there- 
fore become  probable  that  such  poems  should  be  composed  in  the 
age  of  the  Babylonian  captivity,  so  that  we  may  assert  this  without 
any  historical  testimony  or  tradition  :  more  especially  as  we  find  no- 
thing similar  in  the  writings  of  Jeremiah   or  Ezekiel,  who  wanted 

neither  genius  nor  polish. The  language  itself  is  not  the  same  as 

that  observable  in  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel :  it  is  not  probable  that  any 
one  could  have  cultivated  the  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  during  the 
captivity  more  thoroughly  than  they,  nor  is  such  a  state  of  the  lan- 
guage discernible  in  Zechariah,  who  is  usually  cited  aS  an  instance 

of  it. Lastly,  the  arrangement  and  method  of  treating  the  subject, 

are  the  same  in  all  these  prophecies.  Chap.  vii.  contains  a  prophecy 
interwoven  with  a  history,  which  is  followed,  c.  viii — xii,  by  prophe- 
cies without  titles ;  so  also  in  c.  xxxix,  the  prophecy  is  woven  into 
the  history,  and  prophecies  without  a  title  follow.  As  in  the  first 
part  there  are  several  prophecies  concerning  Sennacherib  :  so  also 
in  the  second,  there  are  several  concerning  the  overthrow  of  the 
Chaldean  monarchy,  and  the  return  of  the  Hebrews  from  captivity. 
As  in  the  vision  in  c.  vi,  we  read  that  the  prophet's  efforts  should  not 
be  accompanied  by  a  happy  result ;  so  the  prophet,  c.  xlii.  16,  23. 
xliii.  8.  xlv.  4,  and  especially  xlix.  4.  lix.  6.  complains  that  his  en- 
deavours had  been  unsuccessful. 

n.  What  is  said  in  c.  Ixvi.  1 — 6,  of  the  temple,  does  not  suit  the 
latter  part  of  the  period  of  exile,  in  which  Haggai  and  Zechariah 
speak  altogether  differently  on  the  same  subject.  Much  less  could 
any  one  during  the  captivity  write,  as  in  xlviii.  4 — 8,  that  the  ruin 
and  utter  destruction  of  the  city  of  Babylon  had  not  yet  been  fore- 
told, when  Jeremiah,  1.  li.,  had  plainly  predicted  it  ;  or  speak,  as  in 
lii.  4,  of  the  Egyptians  and  Assyrians  as  the  only  enemies  of  the  He- 
brews, and  pass  over  the  Chaldeans. The  severe  reproofs,  Ivi.  9 

— lix.  20.  Ixv.  11 — 16  ;  especially  those  denounced  against  the  shep- 
herds, i.  e.  the  kings,  Ivi.  11.  s.  ;  the  reproaches  not  only  on  account 
of  idolatry,  but  also  of  the  immolation  of  children,  Ivii.  1 — 13,  and  of 
enormous  corruption  of  morals,  Iviii.  6 — 9.  lix.  1 — 8,  are  entirely  at 
variance  with  the  times  of  the  captivity.  Then,  we  might  rather  ex- 
pect mention  to  be  made  of  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  as  in  Dan.  ix. 
2.  and  that  more  should  be  said  respecting  the  Magians  or  worship- 


348  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH   BOOK 

pers  of  Ormuzd,  than  that  one  allusion  to  the  two  principles  of  things, 
xlv.  7,  which  certainly  were  maintained  by  very  many  in  an  age  older 
than  that  of  the  captivity.  Comp.  below,  §  150  and  Archaeol.  Germ. 
P.  II.  T.  II.  §  179.  S.  282—285.  [Upham's  Trans.  §  312]. 

III.  Jeremiah  shows  that  he  had  read  these  prophecies,  and  that 
too  seven  years  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Jer.  li.  49 — 64  ; 
for  the  connexion  of  the  prophecy  of  Jeremiah  contained  Jer.  1.  li., 
vsrith  those  of  Isaiah  with  which  we  are  at  present  concerned,  is  evi- 
dent :  nor  can  it  be  said,  that  the  author  of  the  controverted  prophe- 
cies of  Isaiah,  living  toward  the  end  of  the  captivity,  had  read  the 
book  of  Jeremiah  ;  for  he  is  an  original  and  independent  author, 
drawing  entirely  from  his  own  resources,  and  never  imitating  others  ; 
while,  on  the  contrary,  it  is  well  known  that  Jeremiah  had  read  the 
older  prophets,  and  borrowed  much  from  them,  especially  in  his  pro- 
phecies against  foreign  nations.  In  my  German  Introduction,  I  have 
instituted  a  comparison  of  the  two  prophets  which  I  could  now  greatly 
enlarge,  did  the  limits  of  this  work  permit.  Some  passages  have 
been  observed  in  other  prophets  also,  which  have  been  taken  from 
the  controverted  prophecies  of  Isaiah  :  as,  Zeph.  ii.  14.  s.  from  Isa. 
xiii.  21.  s.  ;  Ezek.  xxxiv.  from  Isa.  Ivii.  10.  ss. ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  20. 
xxxi.  14 — 17.  xxxii.  18 — 33,  from  Isa.  xiv.  8 — 28  ;  Ezek.  xxvi.  13, 
from  Isa.  xxiii.  25  ;  Ezek.  xxxviii — xxxix,  from  Isa.  Ixvi.  6 — 9,  24, 
That  Habbakuk  is  indebted  to  Isaiah,  has  been  long  since  observed  : 
comp.  Hab.  i.  6,  with  Isa.  xxiii.  13. 

IV.  Cyrus,  in  his  written  proclamation,  Ezra  i.  2,  says,  that  the 
God  of  heaven  had  given  him  all  kingdoms  of  the  earth,  and  had  char- 
ged him  to  build  to  Him  a  temple  at  Jerusalem. These  words,  as 

well  as  the  acts  of  Cyrus,  namely,  his  dismission  of  the  Jews  to  their 
own  country,  his  grant  of  a  sum  of  money  for  the  building  of  the  tem- 
ple, and  his  restitution  of  the  valuable  holy  vessels,  can  only  be  ex- 
plained on  the  supposition  that  he  had  seen  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
concerning  him  as  Josephus  states,  and  was  induced  by  their  mani- 
festly divine  origin,  to  confer  such  great  benefits  upon  the  Jews. 
Nor  was  Cyrus  the  man  to  suffer  recent  prophecies  scarcely  yet  pub- 
lished to  be  palmed  upon  him  for  ancient ;  not  to  mention  that  there 
were  many  who  would  have  been  glad  to  discover  to  him  the  fraud,  if 
any  had  existed.    Neither  would  Cyrus  the  Magian.  who  built  nothing 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  349 

but  pyres  to  Ormuzd,  have  been  so  easily  led  to  construct  a  magnifi- 
cent temple  to  the  God  of  the  Jews. 

It  may,  indeed,  seem  strange  that  the  prophet  should  say  so  much 
concerning  the  return  from  Babylon,  and  yet  make  no  express  men- 
tion of  the  carrying  away.  But  he  certainly  does  say  something  con- 
cerning this  subject  as  xxxix.  4 — 7  vi.  11  — 13.  v.  5 — 9.  xi  11 — 16  ; 
and  Micah  the  contemporary  of  Isaiah,  speaks  clearlv  of  this  carrying 
away,  andof  the  overthrow  of  Jerusalem  ;  so  that  it  would  seem  pro- 
bable that  Isaiah  had  said  more  on  this  subject,  which  has  not  been 
preserved  to  us.  If  this  were  the  case,  the  prophet  who  sings  the 
glad  return,  would  no  more  contradict  himself  by  predicting  the  car- 
rying away,  than  Jeremiah  does,  who  has  predicted  both  events  [6] 
To  all  this  analogy  is  said  to  be  opposed,  according  to  which,  it 
is  thought,  prophets  do  not  foretell  such  remote  events  as  those  con- 
cerning the  Chaldeans,  the  Medes  and  Persians,  Cyrus,  and  the  return 
of  the  Hebrews,  which  Isaiah  has  predicted.  But  this  analogy  as  I 
have  already  remarked,  is  by  no  means  universal.  Besides,  in  this 
objection  it  is  supposed  that  the  Chaldeans,  Medes,  and  Persians, 
were  in  the  age  of  Isaiah,  obscure  nations,  or  entirely  unknown ; 
whereas,  in  fact,  the  Medes,  almost  100  years  before  Isaiah  and  Heze- 
kiah  (826  before  Christ,  149  after  the  division,)  had,  under  their  king 
Arbaces  joined  in  alliance  with  Beleses  the  governor  of  Babylon, 
overthrown  the  first  Assyrian  monarchy.  It  is  true  that  the  Median 
anarchy  of  seventy-nine  years  followed  but  in  the  tenth  of  Hezekiah, 
(728  before  Christ,  257  after  the  division  )  they  elected  Dejoces 
king,  who  founded  Ecbatana,  and  whose  son  Phraortes  (666 — 643 
before  Christ,  310 — 332  after  the  division,)  attacking  the  new  king- 
dom of  the  Assyrians,  was  slain  while  besieging  Nineveh  :  and  under 
Cyaxares  T.  Zoroaster  found  the  kingdom  of  the  Medes  again  flour- 
ishing.*  Elam  was  a  celebrated  kingdom  even  in  the  most  ancient 

times,  Gen.  c.  xiv.,  and  it  is  always  by  the  ancient  name  chy,  Gen. 

X.  22,  xiv.  1.  that  Isaiah  mentions  it,  and  never  by  the  modern  ap- 
pellation D">D,  which  is  given  it,    Dan    vi.  28.   Ezr.  i.   1,2.  iv.  6. 

T      T 

II  Chr.  xxxvi.  22.  s.     The  Elamites  are  mentioned  as  a  part  of  the 
*  [Comp.  Prideaux  Conn.  P.  I.  B.  I.    TV.] 


;i50         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

army  of  the  Assyrians,  Isa.  xxii.  6.,  which  prophecy  is  certainly  Isaiah's, 
as  appears  from  v.  8 —  1 1 .  comp,  II  Chr.  xxxii.  2 — 5.  Esarhaddon  sent 
some  Elamites  among  his  other  colonists  to  Samaria :  Ezr.  iv.  9.  s. 
At  a  later  period  Jeremiah  c.  xxv.  25.  xlix  24.  s.,  mentions  Elam 
among  the  powerful  kingdoms  which  should  be  conquered  by  the 

Chaldeans,  and  Ezekiel,  c.  xxxii.  24,  beholds  Elam  overthrown. 

It  is  only  by  a  long  succession  of  time  and  victories,  that  nations  are 
enabled  to  conquer  the  surrounding  people,  and  spread  themselves  so 
widely  as  to  obtain  sufficient  celebrity  to  entitle  them  to  an  eminent 
place  in  history.  It  was  not,  therefore,  in  a  short  space  of  time  that 
the  Chaldeans,  Medes,  and  Elamites  or  Persians,  emerged  from  their 
obscurity  into  so  great  a  light,  as  to  become  conspicuous  to  the  world 
when  before  they  had  been  utterly  unknown.  If  then  Isaiah  foretells 
the  overthrow  of  the  Chaldeans  by  the  Medes  and  Elamites,  his  pro- 
phecy in  that  age  would  have  been  neither  more  nor  less  obscure  than 
Zechariah's  (ix,  13.)  concerning  the  wars  of  the  Jews  against  the 
Greeks  in  Syria.  Isaiah  might  easily  have  used  the  name  Cyrus, 
lyio,  (or  Koresh,),  xliv.  28.  xlv    1,  since  it  means  nothing  more 

than  king ;  for  in  the  language  of  the  Parsees  Khor  means  the  sun, 
and  ScHiD,  splendour,  whence  is  compounded  Korschid,  the  splen- 
dour of  the  sun,  and  with  the  addition  of  the  word  pae  or  pai  habita- 
tion, KoRSCHiDPAi,  the  habitation  of  the  splendour  of  the  sun,  which 
Avas  a  customary  appellation  of  the  kings  of  Persia.  Comp.  my 
ArchaBol.  P.  II.  T.  II.  §  179.  S.  286.  This  appellation  corrupted 
into  v;'\)3,  (Koresh),  might  become  known  to  the  Hebrews  by  means 

of  merchants  travelling  between  Judea  and  Persia  ;  and  Isaiah,  who 
did  not  hesitate  to  call  Cyrus  the  anointed,  r\''^n,  may  have  called  him 

by  the  appellative  of  the  kings  of  Persia,  which  became  afterwards  the 
proper  name  of  that  particular  king. 

[a)  KoppE  was  the  first  who  questioned  the  genuineness  of  all  the 
prophecies  which  go  under  the  name  of  Isaiah.  He  published  a  transla- 
tion in  German  of  Bishop  Lowth's  Isaiah,  with  the  preliminary  disser- 
tation and  notes,  accompanied  with  his  own  additions  and  observations. 
Leipz.  IV.  vol.  \1l9—8l.  Gesenius'  lesaia,  Einleitung,  {  20.  S.  135.  f.; 
ElCHHORnr's  Einleitung  in  das  A.  T.  Goctt.  1824.  J  524.  Th.  IV.  S.  82. 
note  8;]    RosENMnEt,r,ERi  Scholia    in  Isaiam.    Leipe.  1811.   Vol.  I. 


OF    THE    OLD    TEST  AMEN  1.  351 

iiotitia  interp.  p,  xxii.; The  genuineness  of  the  last  part   (xl — Ixvi.) 

was  first  attacked  by  Doederlein,  (Auserlesene  Theolog.  Biblioth. 
B.  I.  St.  XI.  S.  832,)  then  by  Eichhorn,  (Biblioth.  der  Bibl.  Literatur, 
S.  1044—1046.  Einleit.  {  525).  Doederlein  again,  (Theolog.  BibL 
B.  IV.  St.  VIII.  S.  573—575.  Prsef.  ad  vers.  Lat.  Esaiae  p.  XV.); 
JirsTi,  (iiber  die  Orakel  des  lesaias,  die  Wegfiihrung  der  Juden  ins 
Babylonische  exil  und  ihre  Riickkehr  ins  Vaterland,  betreffend,  in  Pac- 
LUS'  Memorabilien,  St.  IV.  S.  139.  fF.,  enlarged  in  his  Vermischten  Ab- 
handlungen,  B.  I.  S.  254.  ff.  B.  II.  S.  1.  ff);  Bauer,  (in  Schulzii 
Scholia  in  V.  T.  cent.  Bauer,  Vol.  VIII.  IX.  Einleit.  in  das  A.  T. 
§  356,  357.);  Paulus,  (Clavis  iiber  den  lesaias,  S  277);  Rosenmuel- 
liER,  (Scholia  in  Isa.  Part  III.  Prsef.  p.  3 — 5.)  Bertholdt,  (Einleit.  in 
das  A.  und  N.  T.  S.  1356,)  and  De  Wette,  (Comment,  de  morte  Jesu 
Christi  expiatoria,  p.  26.  ss.  and  Einleit.  in  das  A.  T.  J  208.  S.  286.  ff. 
auf.  Berlin,  1822).  In  favour  of  its  genuineness  Hensi.er  has  written, 
(Neue  Uebersetzung  des  lesaia,  1788);  Piper,  Integrilat  des  lesaias, 
1793,);  Beckhaus,  (Integritat  der  Prophetischen  Schriften  des  A.  T. 
1796.  S.  152.  ff.)  although  he  afterwards  entertained  doubts  ;  Greve, 
(Ultima  Cap.  lesaise,  Amstdod.  1810.  Prolog,  p.  1 — 21);  Jahjv,  (as 
above,  and  in  his  Einleit.  S.  458  ff.)  and  Dereser  (Uebersetzung  des 
Jesaia  in  Brentanos  Bibelwerk  S.  2.  ff.).  See  Jahn  ut  sup.  and  Gesen. 
lesaia.  Th.  III.  Einleit.  S.  18.  f.  Gesenius  considers  Jahn's  arguments 
as  not  entitled  to  much  weight.  His  opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  inspira- 
tion would  naturally  lead  him  to  reject  a  considerable  part  of  Isaiah's 
prophecy.  It  is  well  remarked  by  Jahn  that  the  difficulties  which  critics 
have  found  on  this  subject  have  arisen  from  an  erroneous  view  of  the 
character  of  the  Hebrew  prophets.    Eialeit.  S.  470.     TV.] 

\b)  Prophets  are  not,  like  historians,  confined  to  the  order  of  chrono- 
logy in  announcing  future  events.  This  is  plain  from  their  writings  ,- 
which  always  give  perspective  views.  Zechariah  predicted  a  kingdom 
for  the  high  priest,  without  noticing  the  destruction  of  the  Persian  monar- 
chy and  the  division  of  the  Greek  power.  Isaiah  foretold  the  return  of 
the  Israelites  from  the  Assyrian  captivity,  without  saying  any  thing  of 
the  intervening  revolutions  by  the  Chaldeans,  Medes,  and  Persians.  In 
prophecy  the  more  remote  events  are  often  introduced,  while  the  inter- 
mediate are  unnoticed.] 

§  106.     Prophecies  denied  to  he  Isaiah's. 

The  objections  that  are  made  to  some  of  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah 
may  be  answered  in  few  words. 

I.  Some  have  said  that  the  fragment,  Isa.  ii.  2 — 4,  is  inserted  hf 
mistake  by  the  person  whom  they  suppose  to  have  collected  the  se 


352  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOK 

veral  prophecies  into  this  one  book,  about  the  end  of  the  Babylonish 
captivity ;  but  others  have  already  remarked  that  this  passage  may 
have  been  taken  by  Isaiah  from  Mic.  iv.  1 — 3,  or  by  Micah  from 
Isaiah,*  or  by  both  from  some  more  ancient  prophecy. 

II.  Chaps,  xi.  and  xii.  have  been  supposed  not  to  belong  to  Isaiah, 
because,  c.  xi.  1 1 — 16,  the  very  distant  event  of  the  return  of  the 
Israelites  from  Assyria  and  Egypt  and  other  regions,  is  predicted. 
But  this  return  was  predicted  also  by  Micah,  the  contemporary  of 
Isaiah,  by  Hosea,  and  by  Amos.t 

III.  The  prophecy  c.  xv.  xvi.  is  thought  to  have  been  written  three 
years  before  the  devastation  of  Moab  by  Nebuchadnezzar  xiv.  13.  s., 
because  Zephaniah,  ii.  8.  ss..  and  .leremiah.  c.  xlviii.,  threaten  the 
Moabites  with  the  same  calamity.  But  who  can  show  that  Isaiah 
did  not  speak  of  another  calamity  to  be  inflicted  upon  them  by  the 
Assyrians  ?  or  who  would  suppose  that  the  Assyrians  spared  the 
Moabites  ?  Their  country  was  devastated,  therefore,  as  Isaiah  fore- 
told, by  the  Assyrians,  and  then  again  by  the  Chaldeans,  of  whom 
Zephaniah  and  Jeremiah  prophesied.  That  this  prophecy  of  Isaiah 
was  much  older  than  the  time  of  Jeremiah,  is  certain  ;  for  Jeremiah, 
c.  xlviii.  borrows  many  ideas  from  it,  as  must  be  evident  to  every  one 
who  compares  the  two.  That  it  is  the  production  of  Isaiah  himself, 
is  shown  by  the  time  of  its  fulfilment  being  stated,  which  is  according 
to  Isaiah's  usual  practice.     See  vii.  14 — 17.  viii.  4.  s. 

IV.  No  other  reason  is  brought  to  prove  that  the  passage  c.  xix. 
18 — 25.  is  not  Isaiah's,  than  this,  that  in  the  same  chapter,  v.  1 — 15. 
a  prophecy  of  the  calamity  of  Egypt  had  preceded,  whereas  v.  18 — 
25.  predict  prosperity.  But  this  is  nothing  more  than  is  common 
with  the  prophets — to  promise  better  fortune  after  predicting  cala- 
mity. As  the  Egyptians  are  called,  ».  25,  the  people  of  Jehovah, 
and  the  Assyrians,  the  work  of  the  hands  of  Jehovah,  the  prophecy 
must  necessarily  have  been  the  production  of  a  Hebrew,  and  it  is 
much  more  probable  that  Isaiah  should  have  written  it,  than  any 
more  modern  author. 


*  [This  is  the  opinion  of  Bertholdt.     Tr.\ 

t  [These  chapters  are  allowed  by  De  Wette,  Eiuleit.  S.  292.J  although  rejected 
by  Gesenius.    Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEISl.  353 

V.  Isa,  xxii.  1 — 14,  is  rejected  as  spurious  because  tiie  Elamites 
are  mentioned,  v.  6;  but  from  a  comparison  of  v.  8 — 11,  with 
II  Chr.  xxxii.  2 — 6.  and  Isa.  \ii.,  it  appears  that  the  subject  is  the 
irruption  of  Sennacherib  :  the  mention  of  the  Elamites,  therefore, 
must  be  at  least  as  old  as  the  time  of  Isaiah :  why,  then,  seek  for 
any  other  author  than  Isaiah,  who  is  mentioned  in  the  title  of  the 
prophecy  ?* 

VI.  They  who  contend  that  it  is  not  natural  that  Isaiah  should 
have  uttered  so  many  prophecies  concerning  the  irruption  of  Sen- 
nacherib alone,  do  not  consider  that  this  event  was  one  of  great 
importance,  and  contributed  very  much  to  confirm  the  Hebrews  in 
their  rehgion,  so  that  it  well  deserved  a  muUitude  of  prophetic  noti- 
ces. The  style  and  construction,  too,  confirm  the  opinion  that  they 
are  productions  of  Isaiah,  since  they  do  not  diflfer  more  from  each 
other  in  this  respect,  than  do  the  various  Conferences  of  Hariri,  or 
the  different  Psalms  of  David. 

VII.  The  prophecy,  Isa.  xxiv — xxvii.,  is  referred  to  a  more  recent 
date,  on  account  of  the  frequent  occurrence  of  paronomasise.  Now 
we  know  that  these  are  considered  singular  beauties  in  the  oriental 
style,  and  that  Micah  the  contemporary  of  Isaiah  makes  frequent  use 
of  them,  so  that  they  are  no  proof  of  a  recent  date.  Besides,  Isaiah 
himself  elsewhere  frequently  uses  paronomasias.  See  Tsa.  i.  7,  23, 
iii.  1,  6.  vii.  7,  8,  22.  s.  xxix.  16.,  comp.  Hos.  i.  4.  s.  v.  1.,  and 
Mic.  i.  14.  s.  iii.  12.  iv.  10. 

VIII.  The  xxxivth  chapter  of  Isaiah,  in  which  the  devastation  of 
Idumea  is  predicted,  is  thought  to  be  of  later  origin  because  the 
same  devastation  is  predicted  by  Jeremiah  xUx.  7.  ss.,  and  by  Eze- 
kiel,  XXV.  12.  ss.,  and  after  a  long  time  was  first  effected  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar, which  is  thought  to  be  too  distant  from  the  time  of  the 
prophet.  But  it  has  not  been  disproved  that  Isaiah  is  speaking, 
c.  xxxiv.,  of  another  calamity,  to  be  inflicted  on  Idumea  by  the 
Assyrians,  of  which  Amos,  c.  i.  11 — 15.,  had  spoken  before  him. 

IX.  The  xxxvth  chapter  of  Isaiah  is  entirely  destitute  of  anything 
which  could  give  countenance  to  the  supposition  of  a  more  recent 
origin,  and  v.  8.  comp.  II  Ki.  xvii.  25,  proves  it  to  belong  to  the 
age  of  Hezekiah. 

■*  [De  Wbtte,  Einleit.  S.  292.,  considers  this  passage  as  certainly  genuine.    Tr.t 

45 


354  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

§  106.     The  Pr<yp1iecy  against  Tyre,  Isa.  xxiii. 

The  prophecy  concerning  the  destruction  of  Tyre  by  the  Chalde- 
ans, Isa.  xxiii.,  points  out  its  own  age  in  v.  13.,  where  the  Chaldeans 
•^..re  said  to  be  a  recent  nation,  to  whom  a  district  of  country  lying  on 
the  Euphrates  had  been  assigned  by  the  Assyrians,  who  must,  conse- 
quently, have  been  at  that  time  the  prevailing  power.  For  as  Hab- 
bakuk  also,  who  hved  under  Manasseh,  asserts  (i.  6.)  that  the  Chal- 
deans were  a  late  people,  who  were  endeavouring  to  possess  them- 
selves of  the  territories  of  others,  it  is  plain  that  the  time  of  the  deli- 
very of  the  prophecy  in  Isa.  xxiii.  could  not  have  been  far  distant  from 
that  of  Habbakuk.  It  is  indeed  uncertain  whether  Isaiah  lived  till 
the  reign  of  Manasseh ;  but  as  the  Chaldeans  made  frequent  irrup- 
tions out  of  their  own  settlements  in  the  eastern  and  northern  parts 
of  Armenia  into  the  more  southern  territories,  during  a  long  period 
of  time,  without  doubt  these  incursions  had  begun  as  early  as  the 
latter  years  of  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  since  the  kingdom  of  Assyria 
was  at  that  time  so  much  weakened  by  the  assassination  of  Senna- 
cherib and  the  intestine  tumults  which  followed  that  event,  as  to 
afford  a  sufficient  inducement  for  such  expeditions. Without  suf- 
ficient reason  also  is  it  asserted  that  the  70  years  mentioned  Isa. 
xxiii.  10,  are  a  prophetic  number  taken  from  Jeremiah,  xxv.  11.  s. 
xxix.  10.,  and  that  therefore  the  whole  prophecy  must  be  later  than 
the  time  of  Jeremiah.  If  either  of  the  prophets  borrowed  this  num- 
ber from  the  other,  it  is  certainly  more  reasonable  to  conclude  that 
Jeremiah,  who,  we  know,  has  borrowed  from  prophets  more  ancient 
than  himself,  took  it  from  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  than  that  the  author 
of  this  prophecy,  who  every  where  else  appears  to  rely  solely  upon 
his  own  resources,  was  indebted  for  it  to  Jeremiah.  What  confirms 
this  conclusion  is,  that  particular  specifications  of  time  are  altogether 
in  character  with  Isaiah's  manner.  The  distance  of  the  event  pre- 
dicted is  no  objection  ;  for  Amos  had  before  the  time  of  Isaiah,  de- 
nounced the  destruction  of  Tyre. The  Chaldaisms,  Isa.  xxiii.  11. 

TT'JTyD  '\r^wh,  will  disappear,  if  we  point  the  words,  n'JTj^n  -\mh,  to 

destroy  her  weakened  or  expelled  ones,  from    ,    »^  debUitavitf  and 
/■   /  /  ^^J^ 

f^XiZ.  expulit. 


OF    THi;    OLD    TESTAIMENI  .  ."iO^ 

§  107.     Prophecies  against  Babylon. 

The  prophecies  concerning  the  overthrow  of  the  Chaldaeo-Babylo- 
nian  kingdom,  and  concerning  the  return  of  the  Hebrews  from  cap- 
tivity, Isa.  xiii.  1 — 14,  23.  xxi.  and  xl — lxvi,are  referred  to  the  time 
of  the  captivity,  for  the  following  reasons. 

I.  The  difference  of  style :  for  in  the  last  twenty-seven  chapters,  the 
better  part  of  the  people  is  distinguished  as  the  servant  or  worshipper 
of  Jehovah,  xh.  8.  s.  xlii.  1.  ss.  xliv.  1.  xlviii.  12,  20.  xlix.  7.  lii. 

13,  which  is  not  the  case  in  the  former  part  of  the  book. Idolatry 

is  exposed  to  derision  and  contempt,  xl.  19.  s.  xliv.  9 — 17.  xlvi.  5 — 
7,  an  exhibition  not  to  be  found  in  those  passages  of  the  former  part, 

e.  g.  ii.  19,  wherein  idolatry  is  reprehended. The  accompUsh- 

ment  of  former  prophecies  is  frequently  noticed,  xli.  21 — 24,  26 — 29. 
xliv.  6,  s.  xlv.  21.  xlviii.  5,  which  argues  a  modern  author  and  is  not 

to  be  found  in  the  first  part. Lastly,  words  and  phrases  of  frequent 

occurrence  in  the  first  part,  are  not  discoverable  in  the  second. 

II.  The  particularity  of  the  prophecies,  and  the  distance  of  the  events 
from  the  time  of  their  prediction.     In  the  age  of  Isaiah  there  was  no 

Chaldean  monarchy,  nor  were  the  Medes  and  Elamites,  who  are  pre- 
dicted to  be  the  destroyers  of  the  Chaldean  monarchy,  nations  of  any 
celebrity.  From  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah  to  the  founding  of 
that  monarchy  was  ninety  years  :  it  was  one  hundred  and  fifteen  to 
the  birth  of  Cyrus  who  was  appointed  general  of  the  Median  army  in 
the  one  hundred  and  fifty-fifth  year  after  Hezekiah,  and  it  was  not 
until  the  one  hundred  and  seventy-sixth  year  that  he  overthrew  the 
Chaldean  monarchy.  Yet  our  prophet  so  long  before  sees  Judea  and 
Jerusalem  devastated  by  the  Chaldeans,  xlv.  26 — 28  ;  discerns  the 
kingdom  which  had  brought  such  destruction  upon  Judea  verging  to 
its  ruin,  and  its  enemies  already  rushing  from  the  north,  xlii.  14.  xli. 
2,  26  :  and  even  designates  Cyrus  twice  by  his  very  name  as  the  de- 
liverer of  the  Hebrews,  xliv.  28.  xlv.  1. 

III.  The  prophecies  of  events  as  far  as  the  time  of  Cyrus  are  clear 
and  perspicuous  ;  but  those  which  refer  to  later  times  are  obscure  ; 
hence  it  may  be  concluded  that  the  author  was  contemporary  with 
Cyrus.  For  if  it  had  pleased  God  to  grant  such  very  clear  prophe- 
cies in  times  so  far  remote,  and  even  to  reveal  the  name  of  Cvrus  : 


:i5^  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

why  is  it  said,  xlv.  14,  that  the  Hebrews  after  their  return  to  ttien 
country,  should  participate  in  the  commerce  of  the  Cushites  and  Sa- 
bseans,  when,  as  is  evident  from  Ezra,  Neheraiah,  and  Malachi,  the 
event  was  not  so  ?  Nor  were  the  great  promises  made  c.  Ix.  6 — 10, 
ever  fulfilled.  The  contemporaries  of  Isaiah  certainly  never  could 
have  been  able  to  discern  that  those  things  which  were  prophesied 
concerning  Cyrus  should  be  literally  fulfilled,  but  the  others  only  in 
part,  and  figuratively, 

§  108.   The 'prophecies  against  Babylon  are  the  productions  of  Isaiah. 

I.  The  language,  style  and  composition  are  certainly  not  such  as 
must  necessarily  be  referred  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,  and  could 
not  have  been  produced  by  Isaiah.  On  the  contrary,  the  purity  of 
the  language,  the  subhmity  of  the  style,  and  the  elegance  of  the  com- 
position, are  such  as  could  not  be  expected  from  the  leaden  age  of 
Hebrew  literature  ;  but  show  their  origin  to  have  been  in  the  silver 
age.  Comp.  above,  Part  II.  §  104.  The  difference  of  style  in  the 
two  parts  is  not  greater  than  the  difference  of  Micah,  i — v.  from  vi. 
vii.  and  is  less  than  that  which  may  be  observed  in  Hosea,  i.  iii,  com- 
pared with  ii.  iv — xiv,  or  in  Amos  i — vi.  compared  with  vii.  viii,  or  in 
the  different  psalms  of  David.  The  occurrence  of  some  words  or 
phrases  not  to  be  found  in  the  other  writings  of  the  age  of  Isaiah, 
proves  nothing  :  for  it  is  not  to  be  expected  that  in  the  small  remains 
of  Hebrew  literature,  all  the  words  and  phrases  of  any  particular  age 
should  repeatedly  occur.  Yet  there  are  in  the  writings  in  question 
exceedingly  few  words  or  phrases  of  this  kind. [a] On  the  con- 
trary, the  accustomed  vehemence  of  Isaiah,  the  same  dismemberment 
of  objects,  and  the  same  antithesis  between  Jacob  and  Israel,  are  ob- 
servable in  both  parts  of  these  prophecies.  All  the  difference  is,  that 
the  prophet  in  the  first  part  was  censuring  wickedness,  in  the  latter 
endeavours  rather  to  teach  and  console,  as  the  nature  of  his  subject 
required  :  yet  even  here  he  sometimes  inveighs  against  different 
vices,  Ivi.  9 — Ivii.  12.  Iviii.  1 — 7.  lix.  1 — 8.  Ixv.  11 — 14.  If  Isaiah 
wrote  these  prophecies  in  the  latter  years  of  his  life,  it  is  easy  to  con- 
ceive that  the  prophet  now  old  (in  the  time  of  Manasseh,  as  appears 
from  every  part  of  these  prophecies,)  filled  with  consolatory  prop- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  357 

pects,  chose  rather  to  teach  than  to  rebuke  :  but  it  was  peculiarly 
proper  for  a  teacher  to  address  the  people  as  the  servant  of  God,  to 
distinguish  the  better  part  of  the  nation,  and  to  illustrate  the  madness 
of  idolatry  ;  which  last  however,  he  had  done  in  the  first  part,  not 
only  c.  ii.  18.  s.,  but  also  ii.  8.  viii  19,  21  although  with  more  bre-. 
vity  than  in  the  latter  part.  The  notice  of  the  fulfilment  of  former 
prophecies  was  especially  adapted  to  convey  instruction,  whether  the 
author  refers  to  the  carrying  away  of  the  ten  tribes,  or  to  the  deUver- 
ance  of  the  Jews  from  the  Assyrians,  or  to  some  other  more  ancient 
predictions  :  this,  therefore,  is  no  proof  of  a  modern  date.  Such  re- 
marks do  not  occur  in  the  first  part  of  the  book,  because  there  the 
prophet  neither  teaches  nor  consoles,  but  reproves. The  occur- 
rence of  certain  phrases  in  one  part  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  the 
other  might  prove  a  difference  of  authors,  if  the  genius  of  Isaiah  were 
dry  and  barren ;  but  not  otherwise. 

II.  The  particularity  of  the  predictions  to  be  accomplished  at  a 
period  so  distant  is  indeed  extraordinary  :  but  the  prophet  frequently 
recommends  this  very  circumstance  to  the  attention  of  the  reader  as 
something  remarkable ;  whence  it  appears  that  even  in  his  age  it 
seemed  incredible  to  many-  and  therefore  the  fact  that  the  remoteness 
of  the  fulfilment  is  noticed  in  these  prophecies,  is  a  proof  of  the  anti- 
quity of  their  author. 1  have  already  shown  that  the  Chaldeans, 

Medes  and  Persians,  or  Elamites,  were  not  in  the  time  of  Isaiah  such 
obscure  nations  as  that  the  prophet,  when  speaking  of  them,  could 
not  have  been  understood  as  far  as  was  necessary.  That  the  pro- 
phets have  sometimes  spoken  of  very  remote  events  has  been  already 
proved  by  several  examples,  some  of  which  were  even  afforded  by 
Isaiah  himself:  to  these  may  be  added  that  in  this  same  second  part, 
Jesus  the  Messiah  is  predicted,  c.  lii.  13 — liii.  12,  a  passage  so  clear 
that  all  attempts  to  explain  it  of  any  other  are  perfectly  vain  and  fruit- 
less. Comp.  also  Iv.  1 — 5.  Indeed  in  his  very  first  vision,  c.  vi.  the 
prophet  foresees  the  entire  devastation  of  Judea,  and  the  subsequent 
restoration.  Lastly,  the  propa.o-ation  of  religion,  predicted  in  the 
same  second  part  was  itself  exceedingly  distant  from  the  end  of  the 
Babylonian  captivity  ;  so  that  even  allowing  for  argument's  sake  the 
hypothesis  concerning  the  recent  origin  of  these  prophecies  to  be 
correct,  there  will  yet  remain  a  prophecy  verified  in  a  remote  poste- 


358         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    liOOK 

rity,  the  Hebrew  people,  and  more  particularly  the  better  part  of  that 

people,  being  pointed  out  as  the  instruments  of  its  completion. It 

is  certainly  true  that  the  prophet  discerns  the  hostile  kingdom  of  the 
Chaldaeo-Babylonians,  the  cities  of  Judea  overthrown,  the  ruins  of 
Jerusalem,  and  the  downfall  of  the  Chaldean  monarchy,  and  names 
not  only  the  Modes  and  Elamites,  but  even  Cyrus  himself.  But  that 
Isaiah,  receiving  such  revelations  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah  or  Manas- 
seh,  might  so  totally  have  lost  himself  in  the  contemplation  of  a  very 
distant  period,  as  to  forget  the  present  and  write  only  of  the  future, 
will  not  be  denied  by  any  one  who  has  observed  that  Micah,  Joel, 
Habbakuk  and  Nahum  are  altogether  conversant  with  far  distant 
ages.  And  Isaiah  himself  warns  his  reader  of  this,  c.  xl.  1.  xli.  7, 
21.  Ixvi.  9.  by  the  expression  nin'  -\Ovi%  the  Lord  will  say,  comp. 

Isa.  xliv.  5. 

III.  That  the  prophecies  relating  to  times  anterior  to  Cyrus  should 
be  the  more  perspicuous,  but  those  referring  to  more  distant  periods 
the  more  obscure,  is  not  to  be  wondered  at ;  for  in  visions,  as  in 
prospects,  the  more  distant  objects  appear  the  more  indistinctly  mark- 
ed.  That  the  Cushites  and  Sabseans  formerly  carried  on  a  consi- 
derable commerce  and  brought  merchandize  to  the  Hebrews  even 
after  the  captivity,  cannot  be  doubted  :  nor  were  the  Hebrews  of  that 
time  so  universally  poor  as  is  pretended  ;  for  Hag.  i.  they  built  ceiled 
houses,  and  supplied  funds  for  the  building  of  the  temple,  and,  in  the 
time  of  Nehemiah  even  for  the  fortifications  of  Jerusalem.  Besides, 
these  passages  relate  not  so  much  to  commercial  intercourse  with 
these  people,  as  to  their  conversion  to  the  worship  of  the  true  God. 
That  not  a  few  of  them  did  embrace  Judaism,  and  visit  the  temple  of 
Jerusalem,  as  is  predicted  c.  Ix.  6 — 10,  is  certain  from  Ac,  ii.  10.  s. 
viii.  27.  s. 

[a)  The  author  declares  that  after  repeated  perusals,  he  can  find  only 
two  such  wonls :  n^i'  c.  Ivi.  14.  Ixiii.  1,  which  occurs  elsewhere  only 

in  Jerem.  ii.  20.  xlviii.  12,  but  yet  is  not  Aramaean  ;  and  D'3JD>  whicli 

is  found  in  Isa.  xli.  25,  and  elsewhere  only  in  Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  Ezra, 
and  Nehemiah,  but  which  cannot  be  a  very  modern  word,  as  it  was  in 
use  among  the  Assyrians.  See  Ezek.  xxiii.  6,  12,  23.— — Kinleit.  !^ 
48.5.     Tr.! 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  359 

§   109.     Whether  Isaiah  was  the  author  of  c.  xxxvi — xxxix. 

The  chapters  of  Isaiah,  xxxvi — xxxix.  agree  verbally  in  most  res- 
pects with  II  Ki.  xviii.  13 — xx.  19  ;  yet  in  some  they  differ.  Thus 
the  song  of  Hezekiah,  Isa.  xxxviii.  9 — 30  is  wanting  in  II  Kings  : 
on  the  contrary  the  reconcihation  of  Hezekiah  with  Sennacherib, 
II  Ki.  xviii.  14 — 16,  is  wanting  in  Isaiah.  What  we  read,  II  Ki.  xx, 
7.  s.  concerning  the  lump  of  figs  to  be  placed  upon  the  boil  of  Heze- 
kiah, is,  in  Isa.  xxxviii.  introduced  where  it  does  not  belong  :  its  na- 
tural place  would  have  been  after  v.  6.  There  are  also  some  other 
discrepancies  of  less  moment,  which  it  is  unnecessary  to  adduce. 
From  all  this  it  appears  that  the  text  of  these  two  passages  is  so  differ- 
ent and  yet  so  similar,  that  both  would  seem  to  have  been  taken  from 
one  common  source,  namely,  from  the  history  of  Hezekiah,  which 
Isaiah  wrote,  II  Chr.  xxxii.  32.  The  speeches  of  the  ambassadors 
of  Sennacherib,  of  Hezekiah,  and  of  Isaiah,  and  the  attention  paid  to 
minute  circumstances,  show  that  the  narration  was  written  by  a  con- 
temporary witness,  who  was  himself  concerned,  as  it  is  certain  that 
Isaiah  was,  in  the  transactions  which  he  has  recorded.  The  words 
nriD  and  nn^in''  which  occur  in  the  narration,  are  not  more  recent 

than  the  time  of  Isaiah,  and  even  if  nna  were  of  Aramaean  origin, 

that  would  not  be  a  proof  of  a  modern  date,  since  some  exotic  words 
had  already  been  introduced  into  the  Hebrew  language,  in  the  time 
of  Isaiah,  as  may  be  observed  in  the  writings  of  Hosea  and  Amos. 
The  word  nnin'  has  not  in  this  place  the  signification  which  it  ac- 
quired after  the  captivity,  but  designates  the  Hebrew  language,  which 
at  that  time  flourished  only  in  the  kingdom  of  Judah.[a] 

[a)  Those  who  deny  the  genuineness  of  these  chapters  generally  sup- 
pose them  to  be  taken  from  the  corresponding  places  in  Kings.] 

§  110.     The  publication  of  the  Book  of  Isaiah. 

Although  all  the  prophecies  are  Isaiah's,  it  may  yet  be  questioned 

whether  the  volume  as  it  now  exists,  was  edited  by  him. That 

Isaiah  did  not  immediately  commit  to  writing  all  that  was  revealed  to 
him,  is  evident  from  the  title  of  c.  vi.  zra  the  year  of  tlie  death  of  Uz- 


360        PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOK 

ziah,  which  could  not  have  been  written  before  the  death  of  the  king, 
since  it  was  then  unknown  whether  he  would  die  that  year  or  not ; 
nor  could  the  vision  have  taken  place  after  his  death,  as  it  would  then 
have  been  dated,  in  the  first  year  of  king  Jotham.  This  title  (which, 
according  to  the  conjecture  before  proposed,  would  read,  in  the  year  of 
llie  death  of  Jotham),  intimates  that  some  space  of  time  had  already 
elapsed  since  the  vision  at  the  time  of  Isaiah's  committing  it  to  wri- 
ting. The  title  of  c.  vii.,  it  came  to  pass  in  the  time  of  Ahaz  the  son 
of  Jotham  the  son  of  Uzziah,  is  of  the  same  nature,  and  seems  equally 
to  indicate  some  interval  of  time  between  the  event  and  its  being  re- 
corded. Hence  we  must  account  for  the  confused  order  of  the  pro- 
phecies, which  ought  to  have  been  so  arranged  as  that  the  book 
should  begin  with  chap,  vi  and  this  be  followed  by  ii — v.,  and  these 
by  vii — xii.  together  with  chap.  i.  However  this  may  be,  Isaiah 
seems  to  have  published  his  prophecies  singly,  thus:  c.  vi ;  ii — v; 
vii — xii.  and  i ;  xiv.  24 — 27  ;  xiv.  28 — 32  ;  xvii — xviii ;  xix  ;  xx  ; 
xxii ;  xxiii ;  xxiv — xxvii ;  xxviii — xxxv  ;  and  also  xiii.  1 — xiv.  23  ; 
xxi.  and  xl — Ixvi.  Sometime  afterwards,  probably  after  the  death  of 
the  prophet,  these  separate  publications  were  collected  into  the  pre- 
sent book.  Hence  it  happened  that  some  prophecies  were  lost,  and 
some  mutilated,  as  we  have  already  seen,  [a]  At  what  time  the  col- 
lection was  made  it  is  impossible  to  tell.  They  who  suppose  several 
of  the  prophecies  not  to  be  the  productions  of  Isaiah,  contend  that 
the  whole  were  collected  about  the  end  of  the  Babylonian  captivity, 
or  after  the  return  of  the  Jews  to  their  country.  But  this  cannot  be 
supported  by  sufficient  proof  It  is  most  likely  that  the  smaller  col- 
lections, such  as  c.  i — v  ;  c  vi — xii ;  c.  xiii — xxiii ;  c.  xxiv — xxxv. 
were  already  made  at  the  death  of  the  prophet,  and  not  long  after 
were  written  out  into  the  present  book. 

[a)  This  also  affords  a  reason  why  the  inaugural  vision  is  not  introdu- 
ced until  the  vith  chapter,  and  why  c.  xiii.  1 — xiv.  23.  and  c.  xxi.,  both 
relating  to  Babylon,  are  disunited.] 


Oh'    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  361 


CHAPTER  III 


OF    THE    PROPHETS   WHOSE    AGE    HAS   NOT    BEE>"   RECORDED 


§  111.     Of  the  Prophets  of  an  uncertain  age  generally. 

The  age  of  the  prophets  Joel,  Nahum,  Habbakuk,  Obadiah,  and 
of  the  book  of  Jonah,  has  not  been  handed  down  to  memory,  and 
must  therefore  be  elicited  from  the  subject  of  the  books.  This 
method  of  investigation  is  liable  to  great  uncertainty  and  hazard, 
especially  as  the  books  in  question  are  small  and  exhibit  but  few  in- 
dications of  age,  and  those  not  exempt  from  ambiguity.  For  this 
reason,  learned  men  have  entertained  various  opinions  on  this  point. 
It  is  generally  agreed,  however,  that  Joel,  Nahum,  and  Habbakuk 
flourished  during  the  period  when  Hezekiah,  Amon,  Manasseh,  and 
Josiah  reigned,  that  is,  in  the  seventh  century  before  Christ,  from 
720  to  612,  and  from  255  to  368  after  the  division  ;  that  Obadiah 
lived  a  short  time  after  ;  and  that  the  book  of  Jonah  is  a  composition 
of  a  still  more  recent  age. 

§  112.     Contents  of  the  hook  of  Joel. 
Joel,  4x1%  begins  his  book  by  describing  a  lamentable  devastatiou 

of  Judea  by  four  species  of  locusts  succeeding  each  other,  i.  2 — ii.  1 1 , 
which  devastation,  although  represented  as  present,  is  an  evil  threat- 
ened to  a  fiiture  age,  as  he  expressly  tells  us  in  i.  15.  ii.  1,  2,  13,  14. 
The  prophet  represents  these  enemies,  small  in  size  indeed,  but  ter- 
rible in  consequence  of  their  numbers,  in  the  style  of  the  orientals, 
as  an  immense  army  of  God  ;  and  hence  some  old  commentators- 
from  ignorance  of  the  eastern  mode  of  representation,  have  supposed 

46 


362         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

a  real  army  to  be  intended. The  Hebrews  are  then  exhorted  to 

reformation,  penitence,  and  prayer,  which  the  prophet  dictates,  ii. 
12 — 18.  God  answers,  first,  that  there  shall  be  an  end  of  the  locusts 
and  that  years  of  fertility  shall  return,  ii.  19 — 27  ;  then  he  adds,  that 
hereafter  the  gift  of  prophecy  shall  be  more  extensively  distributed  ; 
and  that  a  great  divine  judgment,  a  lamentable  revolution  shall  take 
place,  in  which,  however,  the  faithful  worshippers  of  God  shall  be 
delivered,  iii.  (ii.  28 — 32.) ;  that  a  terrible  war  shall  be  enkindled, 
which  also  is  described  as  some  great  judgment  of  God  in  the  valley 
of  Jehoshaphat,  (a'JB'in"'  God  judges,)  iv.  (iii.)   1 — 18,  and  at  last 

that  these  calamities  shall  be  succeeded  by  a  happier  state  of  things, 
iv.  (iii.)  18 — 21. 

The  predicted  desolation  of  Judea  by  the  locusts  is  not  that  bar- 
renness which  took  place  in  the  age  of  Elijah,  nor  that  drought  which 
is  mentioned  in  Jer.  xiv.  It  is  the  famine  which  happened  in  the 
time  of  the  Maccabees,  I  Mace.  ix.  23 — 27.  For  the  prophet  makes 
no  mention  of  a  king,  but  of  elders  and  priests  ;  he  says  nothing 
about  idolatry,  which  at  no  time  before  the  exile  had  entirely  ceased ; 
he  does  not  name  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  but  only  Judah  and  Jerusa- 
lem, and  in  iv.  (iii.)  2,  he  applies  to  all  the  Hebrews  the  term  Israel, 
as  is  usual  with  the  prophets  when  they  speak  of  times  subsequent  to 
the  exile  ;  nay  in  iv.  (iii.)  1,2,  he  assumes  that  the  captivity,  the  dis- 
persion of  the  people,  the  occupancy  of  the  country  by  other  nations, 
and  even  the  return,  had  already  taken  place  some  time.  He  also 
reckons  the  Tyrians  and  Zidonians,  who  had  sold  Hebrews  to  the 
Greeks,  among  the  enemies  of  his  people,  iv.  (iii.)  4.  These  are 
clear  indications  of  the  Maccabean  age,  I  Mac.  ix.  23 — 27.  v.  14, 15. 

Joseph.  Ant.  XIII.  i.  1. What  occurs  in  c.  iii.  1 — 3.  (ii.  28—30.) 

respecting  the  gift  of  prophecy  to  be  communicated  to  men  of  evei7 
class,  may  indeed  be  accommodated  to  the  age  of  the  Maccabees, 
provided  it  be  understood  merely  of  the  knowledge  of  God;  but  ac- 
cording to  the  proper  force  of  the  words  it  applies  to  the  history  in 
Ac.  ii.  14 — 21.  The  two  succeeding  verses,  iii.  4,  5.  (ii.  31,  32,) 
relate  to  the  last  Jewish  war  against  the  Romans,  but  in  the  next 
chapter  the  prophet  returns  to  the  times  of  the  Maccabee?. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  J63 

§  113.     Style  of  Joel. 

The  language  of  Joel  is  pure,  his  style  elegant,  the  figures  well 
chosen  and  judiciously  managed,  and  the  whole  composition  pos- 
sesses a  degree  of  sublimity  similar  to  that  of  Hosea  and  Micah. 
The  delineations  of  the  locusts,  of  the  great  mourning,  and  of  the 
golden  age  are  admirable,  and  the  images  of  the  valley  of  Jehosha- 
phat,  and  of  the  fountain  arising  from  the  temple,  no  less  agreeable, 
iv.  (iii.)  2,  12,  18 — 21.     Comp.  Ezek.  xlvii.  and  Zech.  xiv.  8. [a] 

[a)  A  great  degree  of  originality  and  invention  is  also  observable 
throughout  the  whole.     Eichh.  §  561,  notices  as  uncommon  words,  pe-     > 
culiar  to  Joel,   inNi),    ii.  6;   n3"lJD,  Vj^y,  nn"t3,   i.  17;  and  E^^i*. 

iv.  11.     TV.] 

§  114.     The  age  of  Joel. 

The  time  in  which  Joel,  the  son  of  Pethuel,  lived,  is  a  doubtful 
question,  [a]  Yet  the  purity  of  his  language  and  the  elegance  of 
his  elocution  aftbrd  an  argument  that  he  is  not  a  writer  posterior  to 
Manasseh,  nor  does  any  thing  occur  to  justify  the  conclusion  that  he 
is  of  a  more  recent  age,  unless  it  be  the  remoteness  of  the  events 
predicted  ;  an  argument  which  of  itself  proves  nothing. 

[a)  The  iflaprobable  opinious  of  certain  ancient  and  Jewish  writers, 
respecting  the  history  and  age  of  Joel,  may  be  found  in  Rosenm.  Schol. 
in  Proph.  Min.  T.  I.  p.  430.  ss.  A  multitude  is  collected  by  Carpzov, 
Introd.  P.  FII.  p.  300.  ss.,  Rosenm.  ut  sup.,  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  Th.  IV. 
5  558.  S.  299.,  and  De  Wette,  Einleit.  J  230.,  conclude  from  i.  14.  ii.  1. 
15,  17,  32.  iii.  1,  2,  6,  16,  17,  18,  20.  21,  that  he  was  of  the  tribe  of  Ju- 
dah  ;  and,  after  Vitringa,  Typus  doctrinas  Prophet,  c,  iv.  p.  35.  ss.,  that 
he  was  contemporary  with  Amos,  prophesying  rather  before  him.  See 
iii.  4,  19,  where  there  is  no  mention  of  the  Syrians  or  Assyrians  as  ene- 
mies of  Judea,  and  compare  those  passages  with  Am.  i.  9.  ss.,  and  c.  i.  ii 
with  Am.  iv.  6—9.     Tt.] 

§  115.     Contents  of  the  book  of  Nahum. 

Nahum,  Din  J,  begins  with  a  description  of  the  power  of  God  in 

punishing  his  foes  and  protecting  his  servants,  i.  2 — 7  ;  representing 
him  as  about  to  lav  waste  Nineveh  by  its  enemies,  to  overturn  the 


364    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

t 

monarchy  of  the  Assyrians  who  had  oppressed  the  Hebrews,  and  to 
aid  and  support  again  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  i.  8 — ii.  14.  (13.) 
Then  the  siege  and  destruction  of  Nineveh  are  depicted  with  more 
particularity,  c  iii. 

Nineveh,  as  Diodoeus  Siculus  (L.  II.  c.  32.)  from  Ctesias  relates, 
having  been  first  attacked  and  rased  under  Sardanapalus,  by  Arbaces, 
king  of  the  Medes,  and  Beleses,  governor  of  Babylonia,  in  the  years 
877 — 867  B.  C,  and  99—108  after  the  division,  was  shortly  after  re- 
built and  made  the  capital  of  the  second  Assyrian  empire,  which  has 
attained  celebrity  by  being  so  often  mentioned  in  the  bible.  At  last 
it  was  again  overthrown,  under  Chyniladanus,  by  Cyaxares  T.  and  the 
Chaldean  Nabopolassar,  in  the  year  625  B.  C.  and  350  after  the  di- 
vision, and  was  never  again  raised  from  its  ruins. 

There  are  some  authors*  who  suppose  Nahum  to  refer  in  the  first 
two  chapters  to  the  first  destruction  of  Nineveh,  and  in  the  third  to 
the  other,  and  who  place  the  age  of  the  prophet  before  the  year  877 
B.  C.  But  this  opinion  is  undoubtedly  not  supported  by  the  argu- 
ments alleged  m  its  defence.  It  is  evident  from  i.  9 — 11,  14,  ii.  1. 
14,  (13,)  where  the  Hebrews  are  represented  as  already  reduced  to 
diflUculties  by  the  Assyrians-  and  the  irruption  also  of  Sennacherib  is 
mentioned  as  having  already  taken  place,  that  Nahum's  prophecy 
always  refers  to  the  same  destruction  of  the  city,  the  second,  and  i.  12. 
manifestly  indicates  the  ultimate  destruction,  [a] 

[a)  See  the  more  full  discussion  of  this  subject,  Germ.  Introd.  Th.  II. 
3.  506.  ff.  Comp.  Eichr.  Th.  IV.  S.  393.  ff.,  who,  as  well  as  De 
Wette,  §  241,  agrees  with  Jahn,  while  Bertholdt,  S.  1661.  f.,  main- 
tains the  contrary  opinion.     Tr.] 

§  116.     Style  of  Nahum. 

The  style  of  Nahum  is  scarcely  inferior  to  that  of  any  of  the  minor 
prophets.  His  elocution  is  ornate,  and  his  tropes  bold  and  elegant ; 
but  here  and  there  his  sentences  are  deficient  in  fulness  and  leave 
something  to  be  supplied. [a]  See  ii.  8,  9.  iii.  16.  His  description 
of  the  divine  power,  i.  2 — 7,  is  majestic,  and  that  of  the  siege  of  Nine- 

*  [KA.LINSKT,  Vaticinia  Chabacuci  et  Nahumi  illustrata,  1768,  and  Dathb,  Pro- 
phetae  minores  Latine  versi.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  365 

veh,  ii.  4 — iii.  19  .  very  impressive.  The  author  possesses  origi- 
nality, or  characteristic  pecuharities.  Comp.  i.  10.  ii.  4^ — 9.  iii.  17. 
His  language  is  pure  without  any  foreign  admixtures,  unless  it  be  the 
word  DnD£3t3  in  iii.  17,  a  name  applied  to  certain  of  the  Assyrian 

magistrates. 

[a)  LowTH,  De  Sacra  Poesi  Hebraeorum.  Prael.  xxi.  p.  287.  ed.  Ox. 
1775,  has  given  a  still  more  favourable  opinion  of  the  style  of  Nahum. 
"  Ex  omnibus  minoribus  Prophetis  nemo  videtur  aequare  sublimitatem, 
ardorem.  et  audaces  spiritus  Nahumi ;  adde  quod  ejus  vaticinium  in- 
tegrum ac  justum  est  poema  ;  exordium  masfnificum  est  et  plane  augus- 
tum;  apparatus  ad  excidium  Ninivaj,  ejasque  excidii  descriplio  et  am- 
plificatio,  ardentissimis  coloribus  exprimitur,  et  admirabilem  habet  evi- 
dentiam  et  pondus."  To  this  judgment  Rosenmdeller,  Schol,  III. 
245,  fully  accedes.     TV.] 

§  117.     Age  of  Nahum. 

Nahum  is  called  the  Elkoshite.  'B'pSKn,  (i.  1.),  not  to  designate  his 

family,  for  this  would  require  tphu  p,  the  son  of  Elkosh,  but  from 

the  place  of  his  nativity  ;  comp.  Mic.  i.  1.  Jer.  xxix.  27.  I  Ki. 
xvii.  1 .  There  is  a  city  of  this  name  in  Assyria,  three  hours  distant 
from  Nunia,  (a  village  on  the  site  of  the  ancient  Nineveh,)  where 
the  sepulchre  of  the  prophet  is  pointed  out.  See  Asseman.  Bib. 
Orient.  T  I.  p.  525.,  and  T.  III.  P.  I.  p.  352.  Niebuhr  Reiseb. 
Th.  II.  S.  352.  The  more  ancient  writers  make  no  mention  of  this 
place,  but  speak  of  an  Elkosh  in  Galilee.  See  Jerome  Prooem.  in 
Nahum,  and  Eusebius  in  Onomasticon  sub  voce  EXxso'si  Nahum 
therefore  was  a  Galilean,  who,  upon  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdom 
of  Israel,  passed  over  into  that  of  Judah,  where  he  obtained  his  sur- 
name, the  Elkoshite,  from  the  place  of  his  birth.  This  affords  a  suf- 
ficient reason  for  the  preservation  of  his  prophecies  in  the  kingdom 
of  Judah,  which  it  would  not  be  easy  to  account  for,  if  he  had  writ- 
ten in  Assyria,  [a] 

Some  authors  have  attempted  to  infer  the  prophet's  age  from  iii. 
8 — 10.  supposing  that  the  siege  of  No-Amon,  that  is,  Thebes  or 
DiospoUs  in  Egypt,  by  the  Assyrians,  when  Tartan  in  the  reign  of 
Sargon  conquered  Ashdod,  is  referred  to.[b]     But  the  siege  men- 


366    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

tioned  by  Nahum  can  hardly  be  assigned  to  a  definite  age,  neither  is 

it  of  this  that  Isaiah  speaks  in  c.  xx. Nevertheless,  it  is  evident 

from  Nah  ii.  3.  that  the  ten  tribes  had  already  been  carried  away 
into  captivity  ;  it  may  be  inferred  from  i.  11 — 13,  ii.  1,  14,  that  Sen- 
nacherib's invasion  had  already  taken  place  ;  it  is  clear  from  ii.  1, 
that  no  very  considerable  time  had  elapsed  since  that  invasion  ;  and 
lastly,  ii.  2,  3,  shows  that  the  kingdom  of  Judah  had  indeed  been  re- 
duced to  a  low  state,  but  was  again  to  struggle  through  its  difficulties, 
which  happened  afterwards  under  Josiah.  Nahum,  therefore,  exer- 
cised his  prophetic  office  before  the  reign  of  Josiah,  yet  not  long 
after  the  irruption  of  Sennacherib,  consequently,  in  the  last  years  of 
Hezekiah. 

[a)  MiCHAELis,  Uebersetz.  d.  A.  T.,  XI.  Th.  S.  138.,  Eichhorn, 
Einleit.  IV.  S.  389.  ff.,  aad  others,  embrace  the  opinion,  that  the  pro- 
phet's birth-place  was  in  Assyria.  RosENai.  Schol.  in  V.  T.  III.  p.  242., 
De  Wette,  Einleit.  S.  328.,  and  Bertholdt,  S.  1652.  ff.,  agree  with 
Jahn.  The  striking  agreement  between  the  writings  of  Nahum  and 
those  of  the  other  Hebrew  prophets  noticed  by  Eichh.  S.  391,  althoHgh 
not  so  used  by  him,  is  strong  in  favour  of  this  last  opinion.     Tr.] 

[b)  So  Eichh  Th.  IV.  S.  383.  ff.  Rosenm.  Schol.  III.  243,  and  De 
Wktte,  S.  327.     Tr.] 

§  118.    Contents  of  the  Book  of  Habakkuk. 

Habakkuk,  p-ip^n,  begins  his  work  by  complaining,  i.  2 — 4.,  that 

his  prayers  against  injustice,  violence,  and  oppressions  are  not  heard, 
and  obtains  the  divine  answer,  i.  5 — 11  that  the  Chaldeans  are  to 
avenge  these  crimes.  The  prophet  at  length  discerning  in  vision  the 
slaughter  to  be  effected  by  that  people,  beseeches  God,  i.  12 — 17,  to 
restrain  those  cruel  enemies.  The  answer  is  given,  that  destruction 
is  hanging  over  the  Chaldeans  also,  and  that  however  it  may  be  de- 
ferred, it  will  certainly  follow,  ii.  2 — 20.  This  is  succeeded  by  an 
ode,  in  which  the  prophet  celebrates  the  deliverances  wrought  by  the 
Almighty  for  his  people  in  past  times,  and  prays  for  a  similar  inter- 
ference now  to  mitigate  the  coming  distresses  of  the  nation,  which 
he  describes,  representing  the  land  as  already  waste  and  desolate, 
and  yet  giving  encouragement  to  hope  for  a  return  of  better 
times,  c.  iii. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  367 

§  119.     The  Style  of  Habakkuk. 

The  elegance  and  sublimity  discernible  in  the  style  of  this  pro- 
phecy may  place  it  in  competition  with  any  of  the  others.  Habak- 
kuk has  some  things  indeed  in  common  with  other  sacred  poets,  as 
ii.  12.  with  Mic.  iii.  10.,  and  ii.  14.  with  Isa.  xi.  9;  but  he  makes 
even  these  his  own  by  his  peculiar  manner.  His  figures  are  all  great, 
happily  chosen,  and  properly  drawn  out.  The  ode  in  the  third  chap- 
ter is  particularly  excellent,  [a] 

(a)  The  animated  description  of  the  style  of  Habakkuk  given  by 
EieHH.  Emleit.  Th.  IV.  S.  410  ff.  is  well  worth  perusal.  Jahn  in  hig 
German  work,  declares  that  the  language  of  Habakkuk  is  throughout 
free  from  foreign  words.  Eichhorn  gives  a  consiiierable  number  of  words 
which  he  considers  as  peculiar  to  this  prophet,  but  as  De  Wette,  Ein- 
leit.  S.  332,  observes, '  his  list  needs  sifting.'     p'7p"'p,  ii- 16.  is,  however, 

an  unexceptionable  instance. Additional  instances  of  borrowed  ideas 

occur  iii.  19.,  comp.  Ps.  xviii.  34.;  and  ii.  6.,  comp  Isa.  xiv.  4 Eich- 
horn, Rosenmiiller,  and  De  Wette,  are  loud  in  their  praises  of  the  style 
of  Habakkuk.  Lowth,  de  Poes.  Hebraeor.  p.  287,  says  only  "  Poeticus 
est  Habbaccuci  stylus ;  sed  maxime  in  oda,  quse  inter  absolutissimis  in 
eo  genere  merito  numerari  potest."     TV.] 

§120.      The  Age  of  Habakkuk. 

The  opinions  respecting  the  age  in  which  Habakkuk  lived  are  va- 
rious. That  he  prophesied  during  the  first  years  of  king  Manasseh 
is  shown  by  the  commencement  of  the  prophecy,  i.  2 — 4,  which 
points  to  the  early  years  of  that  king  ;  for  it  is  impossible  to  explain 
this,  as  some  have  endeavoured  to  do,  of  the  Chaldeans  because  they 
are  spoken  of,  i.  6 — 11,  as  the  agents  by  whom  the  iniquitous  persons 
mentioned  in  i.  2 — 4,  were  to  be  chastised,  and  it  is  not  to  be  sup- 
posed that  the  prophet  would  have  offered  the  prayers  contained  in 
i.  12 — 17,  for  the  Chaldeans.  The  sublimity  of  the  composition  is 
in  character  with  this  period,  being  such  as  could  not  be  expected 
from  a  more  recent  age. Finally,  the  Chaldeans  are  repre- 
sented, i.  6.  as  a  people  just  forming  themselves  into  a  body  and 
seeking  a  new  habitation,  which,  as  has  been  already  observed,  they 


368  PARTICULAR  INTROBUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOk 

did  during  a  considerable  interval  of  time,  as  early  as  the  reigns  ot 
Hezekiah  and  Manasseh,  long  before  they  estabUshed  their  authorit) 
in  Babylonia.     Comp.  Isa.  xxiii.  13. [a] 

[a)  Wahl,  Ueber.  Ae*  Habakkuk,  S.  \6,  coincides  with  Jahn.  But 
EtCHH.  Th.  IV.  S.  401.  ff.  I'laces  the  age  of  Habakkuk  subsequently  to 
the  rei2:n  of  Joiakitn,  in  the  commencpraent  of  the  oppression  of  the  He- 
brews by  the  Chaldeans.  De  Wvtte,  Einleit.  S.  330.,  after  Clement 
of  Alekavdkia,  Strom.  I.  14^',  daces  it  still  later,  making  the  prophet 
a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah.  Rosknk[I7ELL£R,  Schol.  in  Min.  Proph. 
III.  341.  s.  supposes  c.  i.  to  have  been  written  under  Joiakim,  c.ii.  under 
Jeconiah,  and  c.  iii.  during  the  three  years'  siege  of  Jerusalem  under  Ze- 

dekiah. All,  however,  acknowledge  the  precise  date  to  be  exceedingly 

uncertain.     Tr.] 

§  121.     Contents  of  the  prophecy  of  OhadiaJt. 
Obadiah,  iTnay,  or,  as  the  translators  of  the  Septuagint  and  Vul- 
gate pronounce  the  word,  Abdiah,  n"n3jr,  who  has  left  nothing  but 

the  fragment  of  a  prophecy  against  the  Edonoites,  upbraids  them,  like 
Amos,  c.  i.  11,  Jeremiah,  c.  xhx.  7 — 22.  [Lam.  iv.  21,  22.]  Ezekiel, 
c.  XXV.  12 — 14,  and  the  author  of  the  137th  Psalm,  with  their  hostile 
intentions  towards  the  Hebrews,  and  warns  them  not  to  add  to  the 
evils  of  these  their  brethren,  because  they  themselves  are  to  experi- 
ence the  same  lot.  Zion  will  be  hereafter  restored,  and  the  He- 
brews, even  the  ten  tribes,  will  again  receive  their  country,  and  take 
possession  of  Edom  and  also  Philistia.  This  took  place  125  years 
before  Christ,  under  John  Hyrcanus.  Comp.  Archasol.  P.  H.  Th.  I. 
§  104.  p.  479. 

§  122.     Style  of  Obadiah. 

The  style  of  this  writer  shines  with  various  beauties,  yet  it  does 
not  equal  that  of  the  more  ancient  prophets.  His  interrogations  in 
particular  are  too  frequent,  and  they  are  not  always  very  happily  in- 
troduced.    Comp.  V.  8. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  ;jt)9 

§  123.     Age  of  Obadiah. 

Many  men  of"  the  name  of  Obadiah  are  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  as 
in  I  Chron.  iii.  21.  ix.  16.  II  Chron.  xvii.  7.  I  Kings  xviii.  3. [a] 
It  is  impossible  to  determine  whether  the  prophet  is  to  be  identified 
with  any  one  of  these,  or  with  him  who,  II  Chron.  xxxiv.  12.  assisted 
in  superintending  the  repairs  of  the  temple  under  Josiah.  His  age 
also  is  uncertain.  It  is  clear  however  from  v.  20.  that  in  his  time 
Jerusalem  was  subject  to  the  Chaldeans,  and  that  many  of  the  citi- 
zens had  been  carried  away  captive  ;  so  that  Obadiah  must  have  pro- 
phesied after  the  removal  of  Jehoiachin,  or  the  seventh  year  of  the 
captivity,  that  is,  subsequently  to  the  year  599  B.  C,  or  376  after  the 
division,  II  Kings  xxiv.  8 — 17.  That  he  exercised  his  prophetic  of- 
fice before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  appears  from  v.  12 — 14, 
where  he  admonishes  the  Edomites  not  to  continue  their  hostilities 
against  the  Jews. 

As  Jeremiah,  c.  xlix.  7 — 22,  has  many  expressions  similar  to  others  i;-. 
Obadiah,  it  is  a  question  which  of  the  two  has  borrowed  from  the  other. 
Opinions  vary  on  this  subject,  and  there  is  not  much  preponderance  of 
evidence  on  either  side,  except  that  as  Jeremiah  has  used  the  works  of 
other  prophets  in  his  other  predictions  against  foreign  nations,  this  fact 
renders  it  more  probable  that  he  had  read  Obadiah,  than  the  reverse. 
The  following  table  of  the  parallel  passages  will  enable  the  reader  to 
foi-m  his  own  judgment. 

Obadiah,  Z).  1.  Jeremiah,  xlix.  14. 

2-  ..  15. 

,,        3,4.  .,  16. 

5.  „  9. 

6.  M  10. 

8.  „  7.  [6] 

[a)  This  name,  like  the  Arabic  Abdullah,  which  has  the  same  signifa- 
cation,  {the  servant  or  worshipper  q/"GoD,)  is  very  common.] 

[b)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  S.  321.,  who  agrees  with  Jahn,  supposes  that 
the  want  of  arrangement,  the  compression,  and  alteration  of  these  pas- 
sages in  Jeremiah,  exhibit  a  still  stronger  proof  that  he  has  borrowed  them 
from  Obadiah.  Eichh.  Th.  IV.  S.  327.  f.  is  of  the  same  opinion.  Comp. 
however,  VERSCHUiRiiOpuscula,  p.  191.3.  (^Traj.  ad  lihen.  1310.)  where 
several  arguments  are  drawn  from  the  subject  to  prove  the  contrary,  Tr'' 

47. 


370  PAKl  ICULAK  INTRODUCTION  TO  EAGH  BOOK 

§  124.     Of  Jonah. 

Jonah,  the  son  of  Amittai,  'r^DN  p  njr,  a  native  of  Gath-Hepher 

or  Gittah-hepher,  in  the  tribe  of  Zebulon,*  Jos.  xix.  13.,  predicted 
the  restoration  of  the  ancient  boundaries  of  the  Israehtish  kingdom, 
11  Kings  xiv.  25,  which  took  place  under  Jeroboam  II.  He  must 
have  hved  therefore  before  Amos-t  about  the  year  825  B.  C.  and 
150  after  the  division.  Pul,  the  first  king  of  the  new  Assyrian  mo- 
narchy must  have  reigned  in  Nineveh  at  the  time  that  Jonah  was  sent 
to  that  city  ;  II  Ki.  xv.  18 — 20.  But  if  Pul,  according  to  the  com- 
monly received  chronology,  ascended  the  throne  774  years  B.  C, 
and  201  after  the  division,  Jonah  must  have  been  quite  an  old  man 
at  the  time  of  his  mission  to  Nineveh. 

§   125.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Jonah. 

Jonah  is  commanded  by  God  to  go  to  Nineveh  and  there  to  pro- 
phesy ;  but  apprehending  that  God  would  have  mercy  on  the  city,  and 
that  his  prediction  would  not  be  verified,  he  goes  to  Joppa,  and  thence 
embarks  for  Tartessus  in  Spain.  God  raises  a  terrible  storm  at  sea 
60  as  to  threaten  the  vessel  in  which  he  sails  with  shipwreck.  While 
all  the  crew  are  imploring  the  assistance  of  their  gods,  Jonah  sleeps 
carelessly  in  a  corner  of  the  vessel  until  he  is  roused  and  urged  to 
call  also  upon  his  God.  At  length  they  cast  lots  for  the  purpose  of 
ascertaining  on  whose  account  the  Deity  has  raised  so  violent  a  tern-  • 
pest  against  them,  and  the  lot  falls  upon  Jonah.  The  prophet,  being 
asked  who  he  is  and  what  he  has  done,  replies  that  he  is  a  Hebrew 
and  a  servant  of  the  God  of  heaven,  but  that  he  is  now  fleeing  away 
from  him. I  Upon  being  further  asked,  what  should  be  done  with 
him,  he  answers  that  they  should  cast  him  into  the  sea  and  that  then 
the  storm  would  cease.  Still  the  sailors,  fearing  to  devote  to  destruc- 
tion the  servant  of  so  great  a  God,  renew  their  efforts  to  reach  the 
shore,  but  are  hindered  by  contrary  winds  from  the  east ;  and  after 
imploring  Jehovah  not  to  impute  the  man's  death  to  them,  they  throw 

*  [The  Latin  has,  erroneously,  Naphtali.     Tr.] 
t  [Comp.  §  90.     Tr  ] 

+  [Or  rather,  from  the  discharge  of  his  prophetic  office.    See  below,  $  128,  note  {b\ 
aote  t  p.  376.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLJ)    TESTAMENT.  3/  I 

Jonah  into  the  sea,  c.  i. But  God  had  prepared  a  great  fish  which 

swallowed  up  Jonah.  In  the  belly  of  this  sea  monster  he  pours  out 
his  prayer  to  God  as  given  in  c.  ii.  At  last  on  the  third  day,  the  fish, 
by  divine  command,  vomits  Jonah  fi^rth  upon  the  dry  land. 

Now  the  prophet  obeys  the  direction  of  God,  goes  to  Nineveh,  en- 
ters a  day's  journey  into  the  city,  and  proclaims  that  in  forty  days  it 
shall  be  destroyed.  Immediately  a  general  i  jpentance  takes  place, 
and  God  spares  the  city,  c.  iii. Upon  this,  Jonah  becomes  ex- 
ceedingly angry,  wishes  for  his  death,  expostulates  with  God  and  says 
that  it  was  in  anticipation  of  this  very  result  that  he  had  wished  to 
flee  to  Spain.  Nevertheless,  he  takes  his  station  on  a  mountain  at  the 
east  of  Nineveh,  and  there  under  a  booth  which  he  erects,  waits  to 
see  what  is  to  become  of  the  city.  God  prepares  a  gourd  (^ricinus, 
the  Palma  Christi,)  which  affords  to  Jonah  a  most  agreeable  shade. 
When,  however,  at  the  divine  command,  this  is  aflfected  by  a  worm 
and  withers,  the  prophet,  exposed  to  the  burning  heat  of  the  sun,  is 
again  greatly  dissatisfied,  and  wishes  earnestly  to  die.  He  is  re- 
proved by  God  for  being  so  much  excited  on  account  of  the  wither- 
ing of  a  gourd,  and  yet  wishing  at  the  same  time  that  the  Deity  should 
be  unaffected  by  the  repentance  of  a  city  in  which  were  found  more 
than  120,000  children  who  had  not  yet  attained  the  use  of  their  rea- 
son, and  a  multitude  of  cattle,  c.  iv. 

§  126.     Dificulties  in  this  narrative. 

The  difficulties  of  this  book  are  by  no  means  triffing.  1)  Many 
extraordinary  things  occur,  which  are  referred  immediately  to  God. 
— 2)  The  preservation  of  Jonah  in  the  belly  of  the  fish  three  days  and 
nights,  without  having  been  digested  by  the  natural  heat  of  the  sto- 
mach, or  suflfocated  for  want  of  fresh  air  ;  nothing  similar  to  which  is 
to  be  met  with  :  and  this,  too,  without  an  object  equivalent  to  the 
magnitude  of  such  a  miracle,  [a] — 3)  The  strange  character  of  Jo- 
nah, who  flies  from  God  ;  who,  when  in  imminent  danger  of  destruc- 
tion by  a  tempest  and  when  all  around  him  are  offering  supplications, 
is  quietly  sleeping  ;  who  voluntarily  offers  himself  to  be  thrown  into 
the  sea  ;  and  lastly,  who'is  constantly  opposing  God. — 4)  Silence  re- 
specting circumstances  which  it  might  be  expected  would  be  men- 


372         PAKTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

tioned  in  the  history :  as,  for  instance,  in  what  land  the  fish  vomited 
out  Jonah  ;  what  were  the  crimes  of  the  Ninevites,  a  point  which 
the  prophets  are  by  no  means  accustomed  in  other  cases  to  pass  over ; 
by  what  particular  calamity  the  city  was  to  be  destroyed  ;  and  whe- 
ther the  abohtion  of  idolatry  was  included  in  the  general  repentance 
of  the  citizens. — 5)  The  general  repentance  itself  at  the  message  of 
an  unknown  individual,  and  the  order  issued  by  the  king  that  a  fast 
should  be  observed  and  sackcloth  worn  even  by  the  infants  and 
beasts. — 6)  The  silence  both  of  profane  and  sacred  history  respect- 
ing so  extraordinary  a  fact. — 7)  The  embarking  at  Joppa,  a  city  re- 
markable for  fictions  and  matters  of  a  wonderful  nature  ;  said  to  be 
more  ancient  than  the  deluge,  and  in  mythology  celebrated  for  the 
account  of  Andromeda  ;  to  which  may  be  added,  the  analogy  of  Jo- 
nah's continuance  in  the  fish's  belly  three  days,  with  the  contest  of 
Hercules  during  the  same  space  of  time  in  the  same  situation. 

The  tree  which  afforded  Jonah  a  shade,  is  called  in  the  Vulgate  ivy, 
hedera,  a  word  which  Jerome  retained  from  the  ancient  version  in  order 
to  avoid  controversy ;  for  elsewhere  he  contends  that  the  Hebrew  word 
p'p''p  does  not  mean  ivy,  but  what  is  called  paltna  Christi,  the  ricinus. 

And  he  is  right ;  for  this  tree  or  shrub  has  retained  in  Egypt  the  same 
name  under  the  form  Kiki  not  only  to  the  age  of  Strabo,  but  even  to 
our  own  times.  It  grows  up  with  rapidity,  but  not  as  is  said  in  Jonah,  in 
one  night.  In  moist  situations  it  reaches  the  height  of  eight  feet  in  five 
months,  and  in  others  in  twelve  ;*  but  it  very  soon  decays.  Its  leaves,  a 
foot  or  more  in  length,  afford  a  convenient  shade.  It  bears  flowers,  and 
green  fruit  and  ripe  at  the  same  time.  On  account  of  its  extraordinary 
character  it  has  received  from  the  Germans  the  name  of  the  wonder  tree, 
Wunder  baum.     See  Niebuhr,  Beschreib.  von  Arabien,  S.  148.[6] 

[a)  The  author  says  nothing  in  his  Latin  epitome  of  the  alleged  im- 
possibility of  a  fish  being  large  enough  to  contain  a  man,  as  he  supposes 
the  animal  to  have  been  a  species  of  shark,  some  of  which  have  been 
caught  with  still  larger  substances  in  the  belly.     TV.] 

[6)  Comp.  also  Bochart,  Hierozoicon,  P.  II,  col.  293 ;  Celsus  Hiero- 
botanicon,  P,  II.  p.  273,  ss, ;  Micbaelis  Sup.  ad  Lex,  Heb,  p.  2185- 
39.      TV.] 

'^  [In  this  country,  it  has  been  known  to  attain  the  height  of  thirteen  feet  in  less 
than  three.    Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  373 

§  127.     Whether  the  narrative  of  Jonah  is  a  parable. 

Expositors  have  at  all  times  felt  these  difficulties,  and  have  used 
their  efforts  to  solve  them.  Some  have  s  ipposed  that  the  narrative 
is  a  dream  ;  [a]  others,  an  allegory  :  [6]  but  not  a  vestige  exists  of 
either  the  one  or  the  other.  Many  of  the  more  modern  interpreters 
therefore  conclude  it  to  be  a  parable, [c]  the  design  of  which  is  they 
say,  to  teach  that  heathens  (of  whom  the  Ninevites  are  designed 
to  be  a  specimen  )  are  of  good  disposition  and  readily  susceptible  of 
reformation,  and  therefore  not  worthy  of  punishment  as  the  Hebrews 
supposed  ;  and  that  the  Hebrews  on  the  contrary,  (who  are  repre- 
sented under  the  character  of  Jonah,)  are  continually  refractory,  and 
remain  intractable,  notwithstanding  the  many  and  important  divine 
benefits  which  they  had  enjoyed.  To  this  some  add  that  the  parable 
is  intended  also  to  represent  the  future  conversion  of  the  Gentiles  to 
God.[d] 

[a)  So  H.  A.  Grimm,  in  a  work  called  Der  Prophet  Jonas  aus  neue 
iibersetzt  1789,  S.  61.  ff. ;  where  he  supposes  all  related  between  c.  i.  6. 
and  c.  iii.  11,  not  to  have  happened  in  reality,  but  merely  to  have  occur- 
red to  Jonah  in  a  dream.     TV.] 

[6)  This  opinion  was  supported  by  Herman  vor  der  Hardt  (called 
by  Lowth,  on  account  of  his  love  of  para  loses,  the  German  Harduin,) 
in  a  work  entitled  Jonas  in  luce  in  historia  vlanassis  et  Josiae.  ex  eleganti 
veterum  Hebraeorum  stylo  solutum  senigraa.  Helmstadt.  \12S.  Comp. 
RoSEJVM.  Schol.  in  Min.  Proph.  II.  338.  ss.  He  had  previously  allowed 
the  historical  character  of  the  book,  and  maintained  that  the  ^sh  which 
swallowed  Jonah  was  an  inn,  at  which  he  was  received  subsequently  to 
his  shipwreck[!],  in  two  tracts.  Jona  in  Carcharia,  and  Jona  sub  Silli- 
cyprio,  published  in  1718.     Carpz.  P.  III.  p.  340  ss.     Tr.'\ 

[c)  So  Semler,  Appar.  ad  liheralior.  laterp.  V  T.  p.  271 ;  MlcftAt- 
i>is,  Uebersetz.  des  A.  T.  Th.  XI.  S.  101.  der  Anm. ;  Herder,  Briefe 
das  Studium  der  Theol.  betreffpnd,  I.  Th.  S.  136  ;  .Niemeyer.  Charak- 
teristik  der  Bibel,  V.  Th. ;  Eichh.  Einleit.  Th.  IV.  S.  352.  ff,  and  many 
other  modern  German  critics.     TV.] 

fd)  This  is  scarcely  a  fair  representation.  It  would  lead  the  reader  to 
conclude  that  all  who  supposed  the  book  oi  Jonah  to  be  a  parabolic  fiction, 
agreed  in  assigning  to  it  the  objects  stated.  But  in  fact,  the  case  is  far 
otherwise :  every  writer  finds  his  own  interpretation  of  the  parable,  and 
their  discordant  expositions  are  almost  sufficient  of  themselves  to  prove 
the  folly  ol  their  opinion  respecting  the  nature  of  the  work.     Semler. 


374    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  ROOK 

with  whom  Micharlis  nearly  coincides,  supposes  it  to  teach  that  the 
hatred  of  the  Hebrews  for  other  nations  was  unjust,  and  that  God  enter- 
tained as  much  kindness  for  the  latter  as  for  the  former.  Eichhorn's 
opinion  is  that  given  by  Jahn.  Hekder  maintains  that  the  author's 
object  was  to  exhibit  the  prophetic  character,  and  the  various  failings  to 
which  it  was  most  liable.  Hezel  places  the  design  of  the  parable  in 
this,  that  the  prophetic  office  is  not  to  be  resigned  on  account  of  diffi- 
culties and  dangers,  as  even  among  the  rudest  and  most  uncultivated 
people,  it  may  produce  salutary  effects  more  than  sufficient  to  counter- 
balance the  evils  endured  by  the  prophet.  Padlcs  contends  that  it 
merely  teaches  that  God  will  revoke  his  threats,  if  they  produce  a 
change  of  life  in  the  objects  of  them.  Mueller  agrees  in  attributing 
the  same  design,  but  supposes  it  to  be  carried  out  in  a  threefold  plan. 
Comp.  Vekschtjirii  Opusc.  p.  75.  s.  and  Rosenm.  Schol.  in  Min.  Proph. 
II.  351.  S3.  Is  any  one  of  the  parables  in  holy  writ  susceptible  of  so 
many  and  such  discordant  interpretations .'  Could  any  regularly  con- 
structed parobolic  writing  so  completely  baffle  and  bewilder  the  inge- 
nious German  critics .-'     TV.] 

§  128.     Whether  the  narrative  is  a  true  history. 

There  are  others,  however,  who  do  not  acquiesce  in  the  preceding 
view  of  the  subject,  and  contend  that  the  narrative  contains  a  true 
history.  But  among  these  there  is  yet  a  difference  of  opinion.  Some 
think  that  the  principal  heads  of  the  account  are  true,  which  having 
been  handed  down  by  oral  tradition,  and  increased  by  the  addition  of 
wonderful  circumstances,  have  grown  to  the  present  narrative,  [a] 
But  any  one  will  easily  see,  that,  in  this  case,  neither  would  the  cha- 
racter of  the  prophet,  who  was  known,  (see  II  Kings,  xiv.  26.)  have 
been  represented  in  a  light  so  little  to  his  honour,  nor  would  that  of  the 
heathen  in  the  vessel  have  been  so  benevolent,  or  the  Ninevites  so 

ready  to  exercise  repentance. Others,  therefore,  are  induced  to 

suppose  that  some  true  history  of  Jonah  has  been  transformed  into 
the  present  narrative  by  some  prophet  of  a  later  age  ;  and  that  thus 
it  is  in  reality  a  parable,  but  founded  on  fact.  But  why  is  that  fact 
passed  over  unnoticed  in  II  Kings,  xiv.  25.  ?  They  who  regard  the 
whole  narrative  in  the  light  of  a  true  history,  appeal  to  ancient  eccle- 
siastical writers,  to  Josephus,  Ant.  IX.  x.  2.,  to  Jonathan's  Targum 
onNah.  i.  1.,  and  to  Tobit,  xiv.  3,  13.  (4,  8.)  Matt.  xii.  39—41. 
xvi.  4.  Luc.  xi.  29 — 32.  They  endeavour  in  various  ways  to  extri- 
cate themselves  from  the  above  mentioned  difficulties.  [J] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  315 

[a)  These  are  distinguished  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  }  236.  into  three 
classes.  1)  Those  who  suppose  the  history  to  be  a  mythical  compilation; 
Thaddaecs,  Sendungsgeschichte  des  Propheten  Jonas.  Bonn,  1786; 
GoLDHORN,  Excurs.  z.  B.  Jonas,  1803 ;  Bauer,  Emleit.  3te  Aufl. 
S.  489.  f.  ;  see  Rosenm.  Schol.  in  IVlin.  Proph.  11.  347.  ss.  ;  2)  those 
who  explain  it  by  philological  p«  rversions ;  Anton  von  den  Alten 
Hebr.  Tonkunst  in  Paulus  N.  Repert.  Th.  V.  S.  36.  fF. ;  and  3) 
those  who  make  a  real  history  of  it  by  allegorically  explaining;  parts  of 
the  narration ;  Less  von  dem  Historisohen  Styl  des  hohern  Alterthums, 
who  supposes  the  Jish  to  have  been  a  ship,  having;  a  fish  for  her  figure 
head,  by  which  Jonah  was  picked  up  See  Rosenm.  ubi  sup  p.  346. 
and  Verschuir,  ubi  sup.  p.  70- ;  Palmer,  ueber  Jonas  im  Wallfische, 
&c.  &c.     TV.] 

[6)  There  are  certainly  difficulties  in  the  narrative  contained  in  the 
book  of  Jonah,  but  we  cannot  think  that  the  author's  account  of  it  is 
satisfactory.  Although  he  does  not  expressly  pronounce  an  opinion,  it  is 
quite  evident,  even  from  the  Latin  work  and  more  so  from  the  German, 
that  he  does  not  consider  the  account  as  a  true  history  of  facts.  And  it 
does  appear  to  us  important,  and  even  necessary,  to  caution  the  reader 
against  being  induced,  in  consequence  of  any  difficulties  like  those  in  this 
book,  to  reject  a  work  admitted  into  the  sacred  canon  by  the  Jewish  and 
Christian  churches,  and  sanctioned  by  our  Lord  or  his  apostles.  If  the 
account  be  parabolic,  or  not  a  true  history,  is  it  conceivable  that  Christ 
would  have  used  the  language  contained  in  Matt  xii.  39,  40?  To  say, 
as  the  author  does  in  his  German  work,  p  531.  that  •'•  he  uses  this  con- 
tinuance  of  Jonah  in  the  belly  of  the  sea  monster  during  three  days  as  a 
figure  of  his  own  continuance  in  the  grave,"  is  saying  nothing;  for  the 
question  immediately  arises,  would  he  have  founded  such  a  resemblance 
upon  a  fiction  ?*  This  is  altogether  improbable ;  especially  if  it  be  con- 
sidered, that  other  similar  analogies  are  in  all  cases  founded  upon  fact. 
Comp.  John  lii.  14.  xix.  36. 

It  is  but  just  however  to  our  author's  memory  to  mention,  that  in  his 
German  Introduction,  p.  532,  533,  he  states  the  answers  by  which  those 
who  defend  the  history  of  Jonah  reply  to  the  previously  enumerated  ob- 
jections.  1)  The  ascribing  of  most  of  the  circumstances  related  imme- 
diately to  God,  is  in  character  with  the  usage  of  Scripture,  which  often 
speaks  of  natural  events  as  if  they  were  produced  by  direct  divine 
agency .t 2)  Jonah's  preservation  in  the  belly  of  the  fish  is  a  miracle, 

*  [The  arguments  of  Vfrschuir,  Opuscula,  p.  73,  79,  87,  91—95.  drawn 
from  these  passages  are  very  strong  ;  indeed  unanswerable.     Tr.] 

t  [Besides,  the  object  of  the  whole  transaction  was  of  sufficient  importance 
to  justify  the  continual  interference  of  the  Deity.  Comp.  Verschuir,  p.  74, 
83.  s.     Tr.} 


376  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

aod  it  is  impossible  to  prove  that  the  design  which  God  had  in  view  in 
producing  it  did  not  correspond  with  its  magnitude.    It  may  have  had  a 

bearing  on  the  penitence  of  the  Ninevites.* 3)  The  character  of  Jonah 

is  extraordinary,  but  not  so  unnatural  as  to  oblige  u«  to  consider  the  ac- 
count of  him  as  fictitious  or  parabolic.  Besides  let  it  be  as  bad  as  it  may, 
the  instance  of  Balaam  proves  that  this  does  not  render  it  impossible  that 
he  should  have  been  a  prophet  of  G.d.t 4)  The  omission  of  circum- 
stances which  would  have  afforded  a  clearer  view  of  the  whole  matter 
may  be  regretted,  but  it  is  no  objection  to  the  account,  and  agrees  with 

*  [To  say  that  it  may  have  had,  is,  indeed,  too  Uttle.  Doubtless  the  extra- 
ordinary circumstances  attending  the  mission  of  Jonah  had  the  effect  of  pro- 
curing the  ready  credence  of  the  Ninevites  for  his  message.  So  our  Saviour, 
when  the  Jews  asked  him  for  a  miracle  in  proof  of  his  heavenly  mission,  re- 
ferred them  to  the  sign  of  Jonah;  meaning,  that,  as  Jonah's  miraculous  pun- 
ishment and  deliverance  was  to  the  Ninevites  proof  of  his  divine  mission,  so 
the  resurrection  of  the  Son  of  man,  after  three  days'  death,  of  which  the  for- 
mer was  a  type,  should  be  to  the  Jews  an  irrefragable  evidence  of  his  divine 
authority.  Comp.  Vlrschuirii  Opusc.  p.  64,  89,  95.  Saurin  Disc,  sur  la 
Bible.  Continual,  par  Roques,  Tom.  VIII.  p.  64.  ss.  Verschuir,  p.  67.  s., 
supposes  that  Jonah  was  no'  preserved  alive  three  days,  but  after  being  de- 
voured and  retained  tlu-ee  days  m  the  belly  of  the  fish,  cast  up  and  brought 
to  life  again.  He  reasons  speciously  in  support  of  this  opinion,  though  with- 
out sufficient  proof.     Tr.] 

t  [1)  He  seems  to  have  supposed  that  the  remission  of  the  punishment  of  the 
Ninevites  would  prove  him  a  false  prophet,  and  cast  imputations  upon  the 
veracity  and  power  of  God  himself;  the  prediction  being  made  without  any 
conditional  expressions.  2)  He  may  have  thought  that  the  mission  of  a  pro- 
phet to  foreign  nations  would  be  a  breach  of  the  prerogative  of  Israel.  3)  He 
may  have  deemed  it  for  the  honour  of  the  true  religion  and  the  glory  of  God, 
that  the  threatened  punishment  should  be  rigorously  inflicted  on  the  Ninevites, 
as  an  instance  of  the  justice  and  holiness  of  God.  A  rigid  zeal,  ungovemed 
by  knowledge  or  benignity,  is  surely  not  so  uncommon  as  to  form  an  objec- 
tion against  the  verisimilitude  of  history.  4)  He  may  have  wished  the  de- 
struction of  Nineveh,  for  his  country's  sake,  which  its  growing  power  must 
ultimately  ruin  Cato's  delenda  est  Carthago  proves  the  possibility  of  such 
overstrained  patriotism,  even  among  upright  men.  5)  Theodoret  has  added 
that  he  anticipated  the  disgrace  which  must  result  to  the  stiffnecked  IsraeUtes 
if  a  heathen  state  should  be  divinely  warned,  and  display  an  obedience  to 
such  warning  which  the  favoured  IsraeUtes  had  never  shown.    Verschuirii 

Opusc.  pp.  51.  s.  59.  s. It  is  objected  that  Jonah  flies  from  God  when  he 

must  have  known  the  futility  of  such  a  procedure.  His  flight  was  not  to  es- 
cape the  the  omnipresent  God,  but  to  avoid  the  discharge  of  his  prophetic 
office.  See  this  amply  proved  by  Verschuir,  ut  supra,  p.  67.— —His  sleep- 
ing during  the  storm  is  similar  to  an  event  in  our  Saviour's  life,  Matt.  viii.  24. 
Mar.  iv.  38.,  and  may  be  satisfactorily  accounted  for  in  different  ways.  Ver- 
schuir, ut  sup.  p.  63.  s.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TES TAMEiNT.  377 

the  custom  of  the  Hebrew  writers.*  5)  The  general  repentance  of  the 
Ninevites  is  not  a  circumstance  inexplicable.  For  in  the  old  world  the 
threatening;  of  a  man  of  reputation,  (and  it  must  not  be  assumed  that 
Jonah  was  an  obscure  or  unknown  person,)  led  to  an  inclination  to  pacify 
the  offended  Deity;  and  some  allowance  may  be  made  for  tlie  use  of  hy- 
perbole, as,  for  instance,  where  the  beasts  as  well  as  the  people  are  or- 
dered to  be  clothed  in  sackcloth,  and  to  fast,  and  cry  mightily  unto  God ; 
or  this  may  have  been  done  with  the  view  of  exciting  the  people  to  peni- 
tence.|  6)  The  silence  of  profane  history  on  the  subject  of  this  book 
may  be  accounted  for  from  the  imperfection  of  history  in  relation  to  the 
Assyrian  monarchy  ;  and  that  of  sacred  history  (comp.  II  Kings  xiv.  25.): 
by  the  fact  that  the  book  of  Jonah  was  well  known.  7)  The  analogy 
of  this  narrative  to  certain  fictitious  matters  of  Heathen  mythology,  i^ 
but  inconsiderable,  and  can  have  no  weight  against  its  truth.'     Tr.l 

'*■  [In  addition  to  this  it  may  be  observed,  with  particular  reference  to  the 
objection  drawn  from  the  silence  respecting  the  crimes  of  the  Ninevites,  that 
the  prophecies  of  Jonah,  in  which  we  might  expect  a  description  of  those 
crimes,  have  not  been  preserved,  and  that  the  present  book  is  probably  only 
an  abridgement  of  his  history.     7r.] 

t  [Similar  iu^jtances,  especially  among  Oriental  people,  are  adduced  br 
Verschuir,  ubi  supra,  p.  46.  s.     TV.] 

§   129,     Age  of  the  Book  of  Jonah. 

The  language  of  the  book  exhibits  Chaldaic  terms,  compound  par- 
ticles, and  other  words  of  a  late  age,  as  'D'7E',  i.  7.,  'D^  IK'xa,  i.  8., 

"^102,  i.  12.  ;  the  words  D"'n'7D,  for  sailors  or  rowers-  i.  5,  and  Sin  for 

master  of  a  vessel,  i.  6.  do  not  occur  except  in  Ezek.  xxvii.  8,  27, 
28,  29.     Chaldaic  terms  are  nrSD  for  'JK,  a  ship-,  i.  5,,  r\W^n'',  he  will 

think,  i.  6,,  and  Di?£3  in  the  sense  of  a  command,  iii.  7.     The  ode  of 

Jonah,  c.  ii.  is  compiled  from  sentences  taken  from  more  ancient 
writers,  which  method  of  composing  prayers  is  comparatively  recent.* 
Lastly,  the  words,  "  Nineveh  was  a  very  great  city."  iii.  3.,  where 
nnTl  cannot  be  translated  is,  intimates  that  the  author  wrote  after  itt 


*  [Yet  Nachtigall,  who  maintains  that  the  book  is  a  late  compilation  from  three 
successive  writers,  allows  this  hymn,  and  this  only,  to  be  the  jrenuine  production  of  the 
Tonah  who  lived  in  the  rei^n  of  Jeroboam  II.     Tr.] 

4P 


378  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

destruction.  From  all  this  it  follows,  that  the  Jonah  who  is  said  to 
have  prophesied  in  II  Kings  xiv.  25,  cannot  have  been  the  author  of 
this  book,  who  must  have  lived  a  long  time  after  the  year  625  before 
Christ  when  Nineveh  was  destroyed,  and  even  after  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  when  the  Jews  vehemently  desired  the  chastisement  of  the 
heathen,  and  could  scarcely  bear  to  have  it  delayed,  a  disposition 
which  is  silently  reproved  in  this  book.  Comp.  Mai.  ii.  17.  and  Ps. 
cxxxvii.  8.  s.  It  is  impossible  to  determine  the  time  of  the  author 
more  particularly,  or  to  identify  him,  for  want  of  historical  docu- 
ments, [a] 

[a)  Verschuir,  ubi  supra,  p.  100 — 105,  examines  all  the  words  and 
phrases  supposed  to  prove  the  recent  origin  of  this  book,  and  shows  that 
they  do  not  necessarily  lead  to  that  conclusion,  De  Wette,  although 
he  relies  on  them  as  proofs  of  a  recent  date,  yet  asserts  that  "  Jahn  pro- 
bably places  this  book  too  late."  He  denies  that  c.  iii.  3.  affords  any  cer- 
tain data.  RosEMtt.  Vol.  II.  p.  358,  asserts  that,  without  doubt,  the  book 
was  composed  before  the  destruction  of  Nineveh  by  Cyaxares,  but  in  the 
latter  period  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah ;  and  that  perhaps  the  author  was 
a  contemporary  of  Jeremiah,  and  composed  his  book  in  the  latter  part  o^ 
the  reign  of  Josiah,     Tr.^ 


OF    THE    01,D    TESTAMENT. 


379 


CHAPTER  l\ 


OP   THE    PROPHETS    FROM    THE    AGE    OP    JOSIAH    TO   THE    END    OP    THE 

CAPTIVITY. 


§  130.     Age  of  Zephaniah. 
Zephaniah,  n''J3irj  or  as  he  is  called  in  the  Alexandrine  and  Latin 

translations,  Sophonias,  is  said  to  be  "  the  son  of  Cushi,  the  son  of 
Gedaliah,  the  son  of  Amariah,  the  son  of  Hizkiah,"  i.  1.  This  pro- 
genitor of  his  was  therefore  a  man  of  note,  but  not  the  celebrated 
king  of  that  name  [a]  for  in  that  case,  it  would  be  reasonable  to  ex- 
pect some  such  addition  as  the  king,  or  Icing  of  Judah.  Zephaniah 
exercised  his  prophetic  office  in  the  very  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Josiah,  while  that  monarch  was  yet  a  youth,  and  under  tutelage,  i. 
1,  9.  ;  but  yet  after  the  first  reformation,  for  the  remnant  of  the  wor- 
shippers of  Baal,  i.  4.  is  large,  i.  5,  6,  8,  9,  which  was  not  the  case 
after  the  second  reformation  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah.  The 
prophet  therefore  must  have  entered  upon  his  duties  after  the  twelfth 
year  of  Josiah's  reign,  (B.  C.  630,  after  the  division  345,)  when  the 
nobles  still  exercised  considerable  power  over  the  king.  This  chro- 
nology is  confirmed  by  ii.  13 — 15,  where  the  ruin  of  the  city  of  Nine- 
veh is  predicted,  which  followed  in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah, 
625  B.  C. 

[a)  So  RoSENM.  Schol,  in  Min.  Proph.  IV.  1.  s.  and  De  Wette,  Ein- 
leit.  S.  333.  But  Eichh.  Th.  IV.  S.  414.  follows  Aben-Ezra  and 
HuET  in  supposing:  the  king^  of  Judah  to  be  referred  to.     Tr.] 


380         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

§  131.     Contents  of  Zephaniak. 

The  first  two  chapters  contain  predictions  of  the  carrying  into  cap- 
tivity of  aU  the  inhabitants  of  Judea,  of  the  desolation  of  the  country, 
and  of  the  destruction  of  the  Phihstines,  Moabites,  Ammonites,  Cush- 
ites,  Assyrians,  and  of  Nineveh  ;  and  in  ii.  7.  the  restoration  of  the 
Jews  to  their  own  land  is  touched  on.  Tn  the  third  chapter  the  pro- 
phet reproves  the  vices  of  the  Jews  which  had  merited  that  desola- 
tion, and  promises,  after  the  return  from  captivity  the  propagation  of 
the  true  religion,  the  perseverance  of  the  Hebrews  in  the  worship  of 
God.  and  a  period  of  rest  and  happiness,  which  it  would  have  been 
impossible  for  him  to  foresee  in  the  ordinary  course  of  nature. 

§  132.     Style  of  Zephaniak. 

The  style  of  Zephaniah  is  by  no  means  low,  yet  it  is  not  so  elevated 
as  that  of  the  more  ancient  prophets.  He  is  not  always  an  original 
writer,  but  borrows  considerably  from  the  prophets  who  had  preceded 
him.  Comp.  ii.  14.  with  Isa.  xxxiv.  11.,  ii.  15.  with  Isa.  xlvii.  8., 
iii.  10.  with  Isa.  xviii.  1.,  and  ii.  14,  15.  with  Isa.  xiii.  21,  22.[a] 
The  language  is  pure,  although  foreign  words  are  occasionally  to  be 
met  with.  [6] 

[a)  De  Wette  considers  these  as  doubtful  instances,  but  gives  the 
following :  Zeph.  ii.  8.  comp.  Isa.  xvi.  6.  Zeph.  i.  13.  comp.  Amos  v.  11. 
Even  these  are  not  such  close  resemblances  as  to  render  it  necessary  to 
allow  that  they  are  imitations.     TV.] 

[6)  EiCHH.  Th.  IV.  S.  418,  and  Rosenm.  ubi  supra,  p.  7,  have  re- 
marked coincidences  in  expression  between  Zephaniah  and  his  contem- 
porary, Jeremiah,  and  even  Ezekiel.  Comp.  Zeph.  i.  5,  with  Jer.  viii. 
2.  (comp.  II  Ki.  xxiii.  12);  Zeph.  i.  12.  with  Jer.  xlviii.  11 ;  Zeph.  i.  18. 
with  Ezek.  vii.  19  ;  Zeph.  iii.  4.  with  Ezek.  xxii.  26.     TV.] 

§  133.     Of  Jeremiah  and  his  Age. 

Jeremiah,  the  son  of  Hilkiah,  ^inybn  p  ^n^DY,  was  a  priest  of  the 

city  Anathoth,  which  was  situated  in  the  tribe  of  Benjamin,  three 
Roman  miles  from  Jerusalem,  to  the  north.  Jer.  i.  1.  xxix.  27.  Jos. 
xxi.  18.  EusEB.  in  Onomast.  Jerome  on  Jer.  i.  xi.  xxxi.     It  is  with 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  381 

good  reason  doubted  whether  Jeremiah's  father  was  that  Hilkiah  who 
in  the  eighteenth  year  of  Josiah  found  a  copy  of  the  law  of  Moses  in 
the  temple,  as  in  that  case  the  appellation  high  priest  would  have  been 
added  to  his  name.  Jeremiah  prophesied  first  at  Anathoth,  or  at 
least  he  was  not  constantly  at  Jprusalem  c.  ii.  2.  until  the  people  of 
Anathoth  and  even  his  own  relations,  plotted  against  his  life  xi.  21, 
22.  xii.  5,  6.  At  length  he  exercised  his  office  in  Jerusalem,  where 
he  suffered  imprisonment  and  chains,  and  was  in  frequent  danger  of 
his  life.  He  was  called  to  assume  the  prophetic  character  when  a 
youth,  in  the  23d  year  before  the  commencement  of  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  the  41st  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  13th 
of  Josiah,  c.  i.  2,  3,  and  he  continued  to  retain  it  until  after  the  burn- 
ing of  the  city.  At  last,  upon  the  murder  of  Gedaliah,  being  forced 
by  the  rest  of  the  Jews,  he  accompanied  them  into  Egypt,  and  there 
died  but  in  what  year  is  not  known.  His  prophecies  relating  to  the 
seventy  years  of  the  captivity,  were  read  by  Daniel,  c.  ix.  1. 

§  1 34.     Contents  of  the  Booh  of  Jeremiah. 

In  the  first  chapter,  Jeremiah  relates  his  call  to  the  prophetic 
office,  and  the  commission  which  he  had  received  to  announce  the  ruin 
and  restoration  of  the  state,  and  by  two  visions  he  is  instructed  that 
this  desolation  is  to  come  from  the  north.  The  prophet  therefore  in 
two  discourses,  ii.  1 — iii.  6  and  iii.  6 — vi.  30,  upbraids  all  classes 
with  their  sins,  and  predicts  destruction  by  a  distant  people,  who 
should  come  from  the  north  and  speak  a  language  unknown  to  the 
Hebrews.  He  foretells  also  the  return  and  re-establishment  of  the 
nation. 

•  The  discourse  in  c.  vii — x.-  Jeremiah  proclaims  in  a  gate  of  the 
temple,  and  exhorts  the  Jews  not  to  repose  their  trust  in  that  building 
Ibut  to  reform,  lest  otherwise  thiey  experience  the  fate  of  the  kingdom  of 
•'Israel.  The  10th  chapter  contains  an  exhortation  to  the  Israehtes  in 
fthe  Assyrian  captivity,  to  keep  themselves  from  idolatry.  The  1  Itli 
'and  12th  exhort  the  people  to  obey  the  covenant  with  Jehovah.  No 
^cloubt  they  refer  to  the  finding  of  the  law  in  the  eighteenth  year  of 
Josiah,  and  the  covenant  to  which  that  event  gave  rise.  The  prophet 
complains  that  the  priests  at  Anathoth,  and  even  his  own  relations, 
seek  his  life.     He  then  predicts  that  the  neighbouring  people  shall  be 


382         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

driven  from  their  lands  but  afterwards  return  and  embrace  the  Jew- 
ish rehgion  ;  and  that  those  who  refuse,  shall  be  again  destroyed, 
which  was  accomplished  under  the  successors  of  the  Maccabees. 

Chapter  xiii.  represents  the  corrupt  state  of  the  people  and  the 
consequent  calamity  by  the  emblem  of  a  rotten  girdle,  and  by  the 
distresses  of  drunkenness  Chapters  xiv.  andxv  relate  to  the  begm- 
ning  of  Jehoiakim's  government.  They  contain  the  prophet's  inter- 
cessions on  occasion  of  a  barren  year  produced  by  want  of  rain. 
God  replies  that  all  intercession  is  vain.  At  the  end,  the  prophet 
complains  of  being  exposed  to  ridicule  and  persecution.  In  c.  xvi. 
1 — xvii.  18.  he  announces  the  devastation  of  the  land,  and  the 
removal  of  the  people  as  a  punishment  of  their  crimes  and  adds,  v. 
19 — 27  that  the  state  shall  be  restored,  if  the  Sabbath  is  kept  holy. 
In  c.  xviii.  he  sees  a  potter  at  his  work,  who,  after  making  one  vessel 
which  did  not  satisfy  him  breaks  it  in  pieces  and  makes  another  out 
of  the  materials.  Thus,  says  the  prophet,  can  God  do  with  his  people 
without  affording  to  any  one  a  rioht  to  find  fault,  comp.  Isa.  xlv.  9.  Ixiv. 
8.  In  V.  18 — 23,  he  complains  of  treacherous  efforts  made  to  destroy 
him. 

In  c.  xix,  XX.  Jeremiah,  in  the  presence  of  many  witnesses,  breaks 
an  earthen  bottle  in  the  valley  of  Tophet  and  proclaims  the  similar 
destruction  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah  and  the  city  of  Jerusalem.  On 
this  account,  he  is  abused  by  Pashur,  and  thrown  into  prison  ;  but 
upon  being  released  the  next  day,  he  confirms  his  prediction,  and  for 
the  first  time  mentions  the  king  of  Babylon  as  the  instrument  by 
whom  the  inhabitants  and  their  treasures  were  to  be  removed.  Pa- 
shur himself  is  to  die  in  Babylon.  Passionate  complaints  and  a  curse 
denounced  upon  the  day  of  his  birth  similar  to  that  in  Job  iii.,  form 
the  conclusion,  v.  7 — 18. 

Chapter  xxi.  relates  to  the  last  years  of  Zedekiah,  and  should  stand 
after  the  38th,  but  is  placed  here  because  the  name  Pashur,  belonging 
to  a  different  person  from  the  one  just  mentio.ied,  occurs  in  it.  The 
prophet  replies  to  the  messengers  of  Zedekiah,  who  had  sent  to 
inquire  of  him  what  would  be  the  result  of  the  siege,  that  the  city 
would  be  taken  and  burnt,  and  the  inhabitants  perish  by  famine-  pesti- 
lence, and  sword,  or  be  carried  into  captivity  ;  but  that  whosoever 
would  go  over  to  the  Chaldeans,  should  save  his  life. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  383 

Chapters  xxii,  xxiii.,  belong  to  the  early  period  of  Jehoiakim'» 
reign,  but  are  placed  after  c.  xxi.,  because  the  termination  of  the  one  is 
similar  to  the  commencement  of  the  other.  Coiiip  xxi.  12  with  xxii.  3. 
Chap.  xxii.  predicts  that  the  royal  palace  shall  be  reduced  to  a  heap 
of  ruins,  the  body  of  king  Jehoiakim  be  cast  out  before  the  gates, 
and  his  son  Coniah  or  Jeconiah  be  made  a  prisoner  t<>gelher  with 
his  mother,  by  the  Chaldeans,  never  to  retin-n.  Then  follows  a  de- 
nunciation against  the  pastors  of  the  people,  in  other  words  the  kings  ; 
the  return  from  captivity  is  predicted,  and  in  perspective  the  second 
David  or  Messiah  xxiii.  1 — 8.  A  reproof  of  the  false  prophets,  and 
a  warning  to  the  people,  form  the  conclusion  of  this  portion. 

Immediately  after  Zedekiah  is  raised  to  the  throne  Jeremiah  sees, 
c.  xxiv.,  a  vision  of  two  baskets  of  figs,  the  one  good  and  the  other 
bad.  He  explains  the  former  as  a  symbol  of  the  Jews  who  were  fellow 
captives  with  Jeconiah  and  whom  God  would  bring  back  again,  and 
the  latter  as  emblematic  of  the  Hebrews  who  remained  in  the  coun- 
try, and  were  to  be  destroyed. 

The  25th  chapter  which  belongs  to  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim, 
when  the  captivity  commenced,  reproves  the  indocility  of  the  people 
during  the  twenty- three  years  which  the  prophet  had  devoted  to  their 
instruction,  and  threatens  devastation  and  seventy  years  service  of  the 
king  of  Babylon.  A  similar  fate  is  predicted  of  various  other  nations, 
including  the  Babylonians  themselves.  This  is  represented  under  the 
figure  of  a  cup  of  strong  wine  which  the  prophet  stretches  out  to  the 
kings  of  those  nations  until  they  become  intoxicated. 

In  the  beginning  of  Jehoiakim's  reign,  Jeremiah,  c.  xxvi,,  predicts 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  of  the  temple,  and  is  on  that  ac- 
count accused  of  a  capital  crime  by  the  priests  and  prophets.  He 
is  acquitted,  but  Urijah,  who  had  made  the  same  prediction,  is  put 
to  death. 

To  the  same  period  belong  c.  xxvii,  xxviii.  By  the  emblem  of  a 
wooden  yoke,  which  the  prophet  wears  upon  his  neck,  he  announces 
the  subjugation  of  the  Jews,  and  also  that  of  other  nations  by  send- 
ing yokes  to  their  kings  by  their  ambassadors  then  at  Jerusalem, 
warning  them  to  submit  to  Nebuchadnezzar.  He  also  warns  Zede- 
kiah not  to  expect  the  speedy  return  of  the  captives  and  the  restitu- 
tion of  the  vessels  of  the  temple  ;  for  on  the  contrary  the  remainder 


^84  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO   EACH   BOOK 

should  be  transported  to  Babylon.  The  death  of  the  false  prophet 
Hananiah,  who  had  announced  the  return  within  two  years  is  Uien 
predicted  as  about  to  take  place  that  year.  It  followed  in  two 
months. 

Chapter  xxix.  contains  a  letter  written  by  Jeremiah  to  the  cap- 
tives in  Babylon,  .\  herein  he  counsels  them  to  settle  themselves  in 
the  country  and  not  to  trust  their  false  prophets  who  deluded  them 
with  the  promise  of  a  speedy  return  ;  for  on  the  other  hand  even 
those  who  still  remained  in  Judea  would  be  destroyed  or  carried  away 
captive.  To  Shemaiah,  who  had  sent  a  letter  from  Babylonia  to  Je- 
rusalem in  opposition  to  that  of  Jeremiah,  the  complete  mortahty  of 
his  family  is  predicted. 

The  prophecy  in  c.  xxx.  xxxi.  of  the  return  of  the  Hebrews,  the 
rebuilding  of  the  city,  the  perseverance  of  the  people  in  the  true  re- 
ligion ;  of  the  times  of  the  Messiah  and  of  the  Maccabees  ;  and  of 
the  perpetuity  of  the  nation,  was  not  first  announced,  as  is  supposed 
by  some,  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  The  prophet  com- 
mitted this  prediction  to  writing  in  obedience  to  an  express  com- 
mand of  God,  that  it  might  be  preserved  as  a  monument  for  the 
remotest  posterity.  Now  as  from  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiachin  he 
regularly  committed  all  his  prophecies  to  writing,  it  follows  that  this 
prediction  must  have  been  announced  before  that  year. 

Chapters  xxxii.  xxxiii.  contain  an  account  of  Jeremiah's  purcha- 
sing a  field  at  the  command  of  God  from  one  of  his  relations,  and  of 
God's  revealing  to  him  the  return  of  the  people  and  the  repossession 
of  the  land,  although  the  city  was  then  besieged  and  would  be  taken 
and  burnt.  This  took  place  in  the  tenth  year  of  Zedekiah,  while  Je- 
remiah lay  in  prison.  A.  second  David  is  then  announced,  who  is  to 
have  a  numerous  family  aad  levites-  xxxiii.  14 — 26  ;  although  this  pas- 
sage is  wanted  in  the  Alexandrine  version.    Comp.  xxiii.  5.  xxx.  9. 

The  first  seven  verses  of  the  34th  chapter  ought  to  stand  before  the 
32d  ;  for  here,  during  the  first  siege  of  Jerusalem,  Jeremiah  predicts 
that  the  city  shall  be  taken  and  Zedekiah  carried  away  ;  on  account 
of  which  (see  xxxii.  3,  4.)  he  was  imprisoned.  In  the  next  portion, 
xxxiv  8 — 21,  he  upbraids  and  denounces  vengeance  against  the  citi- 
zens, because  after  Nebuchadnezzar  had  left  the  city  they  reclaimed 
the  slaves  whom  they  had  before  set  free. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  385 

The  prophet,  c.  xxxv.,  invites,  by  the  divine  command,  the  nomad 
llechabites  to  an  apartment  in  the  temple,  and  offers  them  wine,, 
which  they  refuse  because  their  ancestor,  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Re 
chab,  had  forbidden  them  the  use  of  this  Hquor.  Hereupon  he 
shames  the  Jews  who  had  deserted  the  divine  religion  of  their 
fathers,  and  renews  the  threat  of  punishment. 

In  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim  c.  xxxvi.,  Jeremiah  by  the  direc- 
tion of  God  dictates  all  his  prophecies  to  Baruch  the  scribe,  and  in  the 
ninth  month  (December)  of  the  next  year,  while  he  was  prisoner  in 
his  house,  sends  Baruch  to  read  them  to  the  people.  Baruch  exe- 
cutes his  commission,  and  also  subsequently  reads  the  roll  to  the 
royal  council.  The  king  is  informed  of  the  subject,  and  commands 
the  roll  to  be  read  in  his  presence.  After  hearing  a  part  of  it  he 
burns  it,  and  gives  orders  for  the  seizure  of  Jeremiah  and  Baruch, 
whom,  however,  the  princes  had  previously  advised  to  conceal  them- 
selves. Jeremiah  dictates  the  whole  a  second  time  to  Baruch,  and 
predicts  of  Jehoiakim,  that  he  shall  have  no  heir  to  his  throne,  and 
that  his  dead  body  shall  be  cast  out  exposed  to  the  open  air,  and 
that  Jerusalem  shall  be  taken  and  destroyed. 

Chaps,  xxxvii.  xxxviii.  When  Nebuchadnezzar  interrupts  the  siege 
of  Jerusalem  in  order  to  oppose  Pharaoh  who  is  advancing,  Zede- 
kiah  sends  to  Jeremiah,  at  that  time  not  in  prison,  with  a  commission 
to  make  entreaty  to  God.  The  messengers  are  sent  back  with  the 
answer,  that  Pharaoh  will  return  to  Egypt,  the  Chaldeans  renew  the 
siege  of  the  city,  take  it,  and  reduce  it  to  ashes.  Upon  this  the  pro- 
phet determines  to  leave  Jerusalem  for  Anathoth,  but  is  seized  as  a 
deserter,  beaten,  and  imprisoned.  After  a  considerable  time  he  is 
called  by  Zedekiah,  who  privately  interrogates  him,  and  is  answered 
that  he  shall  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  Chaldeans.  Upon  Jeremiah'. s 
interceding  for  more  favourable  treatment  the  king  commands  him 
to  be  removed  to  the  court  of  the  prison,  (the  guard  house,)  and  to 
be  allowed  a  daily  portion,  as  long  as  the  bread  of  the  city  may  re- 
main. But  upon  being  earnestly  sohcited  by  the  nobles  to  consent 
-to  his  being  put  to  death  he  acquiesces,  whereupon  Jeremiah  is  cast 
into  a  dungeon,  and  must  have  died  a  miserable  death  had  not  Ebed- 
melech,  an  Ethiopian  eunuch  of  the  court,  obtained  the  king's  per 
mission  to  remove  him.     A  second  time  the  king  privately  inquire* 

49 


386  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTIOxN   TO  EACH    BOOK 

respecting  the  result  of  the  siege,  and  is  advised  to  capitiilate,  as  the 
only  method  of  saving  the  city  and  royal  family. 

The  portion  in  c.  xxxix — xliv.  contains  an  account  of  what  took 
place  after  the  conquest  of  Jerusalem.  Zedekiah,  while  endeavour- 
ing to  make  his  escape,  was  taken  prisoner  in  the  plains  of  Jericho, 
and  brought  to  Riblah  in  Hamath,  where  his  sons  were  slain  in  his 
presence,  his  eyes  put  out,  and  himself  taken  in  chains  to  Babylon. 
Jerusalem  and  the  temple  were  burned,  the  walls  razed  and  the  citi- 
zens taken  to  Babylonia,  except  a  few  poor  people  who  remained. 
At  the  express  command  of  Nebuchadnezzar,  Jeremiah  was  released 
from  his  chains,  and  received  permission  either  to  go  to  Babylon  or 
to  remain  in  the  land,  upon  which  he  chose  the  latter.  (The  promise 
made  to  Ebedmelech,  which  properly  belongs  to  the  38th  chapter,  is 
here  introduced,  xxxix.  16 — 18.) Gedahah,  who  had  been  ap- 
pointed governor  over  the  inhabitants  who  stUl  remained,  was  mur- 
dered by  Ishmael ;  but  notwithstanding  this,  Jeremiah  announced 
the  divine  protection  to  the  company  that  had  escaped,  and  was 
dwelling  at  Chimham  near  Bethlehem,  provided  they  remained  in  the 
land.  But  this  they  refused  to  do,  and  went  to  Egypt,  although 
warned  by  the  prophet,  whom  they  constrained  to  accompany  them, 
both  before  they  went  and  after  they  had  arrived  at  Tahpanhes,  that 

Nebuchadnezzar  would  conquer  and  devastate  that  country. After 

their  settlement  in  Migdol  and  Pathros,  and  other  places,  Jeremiah, 
seeing  that  they  still  continue  idolatrous,  warns  them  earnestly  to  ab- 
stain from  this  wickedness  ;  but  they  reply,  that  their  misfortunes 
have  arisen  from  intermitting  the  worship  of  the  gods,  whom  they 
will  no  longer  neglect  :   upon  which  he  repeats  his  denunciations. 

The  45th  chapter,  which  is  a  declaration  of  comfort  to  Baruch,  is 
connected  with  the  36th,  and  contains  the  promise,  that,  notwithstand- 
ing all  the  calamities  of  that  period,  God  will  preserve  his  hfe. 

Chapters  xlvi — h.  contain  prophecies  against  foreign  nations.  1) 
Two  respecting  Egypt :  the  first,  xlvi.  1 — 12,  of  the  slaughter  of  the 
Egyptians  in  Carchemish  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim ;  and  the 
second,  v.  13 — 28,  of  the  conquest  of  Egypt  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  to 
which  is  appended  a  prediction  of  the  return  of  the  Hebrews. — —2) 
Against  Philistia,  c.  xlvii,  which  the  Chaldeans  should  lay  waste. 
This  prophecy  was  announced  by  Jeremiah,  before  the  capture  of  < 


OF    THI-:    OLD    TESTAMKNl.  'M7 

Gaza  by  Pharaoh. 3)   Against  the   country   of  the   Moabites; 

c.  xlviii,  which  also  should  be  wasted  by  the  Chaldeans.     Comp. 

Isa.  XV.  xvi. 4)  Against  the  Ammonites,  xlix.   1 — 6,  who  had 

occupied  some  cities  of  the  Israelites. 5)  Against  the  Edomites, 

xlix.  7 — 22 The  three  last  predictions  were  accomphshed  by 

Nebuchadnezzar,  before  he  burst  into  Egypt  although  not  expressly 
mentioned  in  the  history.    Comp.  Bekosus  in  Joseph.  Ant.  X.  xi.  1. 

and   Cont.   Apion    I.   20. 6)  Against  Damascus,  xlix.   23 — 27. 

which  must  have  been  fulfilled  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
when  Zedekiah  was  brought  to  Nebuchadnezzar  at  Riblah  in  Ha- 

math. 7)   Against   the    Kedarenes  and  circumjacent    Arabians, 

xlix.  28 — 33,  who  were  pursued  and  plundered  by  Nebuchadnezzar, 

Comp.  Isa.  xxi.  11  — 17. 8)  Against  the  Elamites,  xHx.  34 — 39, 

who  were  to  be  dispersed  but  afterwards  collected  together. 9) 

Against  Babylon,  1.  h.  It  is  predicted  that  the  city  shall  be  taken  by 
the  Medes,  in  one  night,  during  a  festival ;  that  it  shall  gradually  be- 
come wasted,  and  a  residence  for  wild  beasts  ;  and  at  last,  shall  van- 
ish from  the  earth,  as  completely  as  a  stone  cast  into  the  Euphrates. 
Comp.  Part  I.  §  17,  at  the  end. 

The  62d  chapter  comprises  an  account  of  the  destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem, in  almost  verbal  coincidence  with  II  Kings  xxiv.  18~xxv.  30. 
There  are  nevertheless  some  discrepancies,  among  which  lii.  28 — 30, 
is  the  most  considerable.] 

The  principal  points  of  these  prophecies  are  the  following. 

I.  The  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  the  burning  of  Jerusa- 
lem, the  carrying  away  of  the  citizens,  and  their  return  after  seventy 
years  of  captivity,  xxv.  11,  12.  xxix.  10.,  the  re-establishment  of  the 
government  and  of  Jerusalem,  the  perseverance  of  the  Hebrews  in 
rehgion,  their  happiness-  the  period  of  the  Maccabees,  the  conquest 
of  the  neighbouring  nations  by  the  successors  of  the  Maccabees, 
and  the  coming  of  the  great  son  of  David,  the  Messiah. 

II.  The  overthrow  of  all  the  neighbouring  kingdoms  by  Nebu- 
chadnezzar. 

III.  The  destruction  of  Babylon,  with  all  the  circumstances  which 
followed  that  event  through  a  long  series  of  ages. 

IV.  Many  predictions  of  proximate  events,  but  which  are  accu- 
rately defined,  as  xxii.  18,  19.  xxxvi.  30. 


388    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  135.     Style  of  Jeremiah. 

The  language  of  Jeremiah  is  simple,  or  to  use  the  word  of  Je 
rome,  Praef.  in   Jerem.,  rustic, [a]  intermixed  with  Chaldee  words, 
forms,  ideas,  and   expressions.     Thus  he  adds,  in  imitation  of  the 
Aramaeans  the  feminine  Jod  to  the  second  person  feminine  of  the  first 
aorist,  as  '^TiiS  ii.  33.  xiii.  31.,  TiN^p  iii.  4.     Comp.  iii.  5.  iv.  19. 

xxii.  23.  xxxi.  21.     He  uses  also  the  feminine  pronoun  •p\n,  thou, 

iv.  30,  and  the  feminine  suffix  O  in  ^Diij^l  xi.  15.     Aramaean  forms 

also  occur,  as  'bin  for  ^Vixn  ii.  36,  and  rhlT\  for  nrVjH  xiii.  19  ;  also 

the  article  as  the  AramaBan  emphatic  state  where  otherwise  it  should 
not  be  found,  as  nan  in  hD^3T^  n-jn  iv.  26.     Other  expressions  are  to 

be  met  with,  which,  though  not  properly  Aramaean,  are  yet  modem. 
Some  words  are  frequently  repeated,  especially  '\p3,  and  even  some 

ideas  in  the  same  words.  The  style  of  Jeremiah  only  occasionally 
breathes  a  poetic  vehemence,  but  is  soft  and  easy.  In  the  prophe- 
cies against  foreign  nations,  where  the  author  has  borrowed  much  of 
the  very  language  of  the  more  ancient  prophets,  the  composition  is 
.somewhat  more  elevated. [&] 

[a)  Yet  LowTH,  de  Sac.  Poes.  Heb.  Prselect.  XXF.  p.  283,  says, 
"  Hieronymus  nescio  quam  sermonis  rusticitatem  ei  objicere  videtur,  cu- 
jus  equidem  fateor  nulla  me  deprehendisse  vestigia."  He  then  proceeds 
to  characterize  his  style  as  follows  :  "  His  sentiments,  it  is  true,  are  not 
always  the  most  elevated,  nor  are  his  periods  neat  and  compact ;  but 
these  are  faults  common  to  those  writers,  whose  principal  aim  is  to  ex- 
cite the  gentler  aifections,  and  to  call  forth  the  tear  of  sympathy  and 
sorrow.  This  is  frequently  instanced  in  the  prophecies  of  this  author, 
and  most  of  all  in  the  beginning  of  the  book,  which  is  chiefly  poetical. 
The  middle  of  it  is  almost  entirely  historical.  The  latter  part,  again, 
consisting  of  the  last  six  chapters,  is  altogether  poetical."  Gregory's 
Trans,  p.  291.  Boston,  1815.     Tr.] 

[6)  Comp.  the  laboured  article  of  Eichhorn  on  this  subject,  Einleit. 
j  536.  Melancholy,  tender  sensibility,  and  somewhat  of  the  verbosity  of 
grief,  are  the  distinguishing  characteristics  of  Jeremiah's  style.  His 
mournful  anticipations  of  calamities  are  the  most  pleasing,  while  his 
threatenings  partake  more  of  a  high  poetic  strain,  and  his  admonitions 
almost  assume  the  character  of  simple  prose.     TV.} 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  389 

§  136.     Order  of  the  Prophecies. 

Regard  to  the  order  of  time  in  which  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah 
were  delivered  is  very  Httle  observed  in  the  arrangement  of  them. 
When  he  was  commanded  in  the  fourth  year  of  Jehoiakim,  (c.  xxxvi.) 
to  commit  the  prophecies  in  the  first  thirty-five  chapters  to  writing, 
he  seems  to  have  dictated  them  in  the  order  in  which  they  came  to 
his  recollection.  But  this  supposition  will  not  solve  the  whole  diffi- 
culty, as  this  part  contains  prophecies  belonging  to  the  time  of  Zede- 
kiah.  The  same  want  of  chronological  order  appears  also  in  the  fol- 
lowing chapters.  The  reason  of  this  confusion  has  not  yet  been  sa- 
tisfactorily explained  ;  probably  it  arose  from  some  incidental  disor- 
der into  which  the  prophecies  written  on  separate  small  rolls,  had 
fallen  soon  after  the  time  of  the  prophet,  [a] 

[a)  So  EiCHH.  Th.  IV.  S.  167.  f.,  but  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  218, 
anm.  a)  contends  that  c.  xxxvi.  28.  proves  that  a  great  part,  at  least,  of 
the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah  were  written  on  a  single  roll. 

The  following  table  of  the  dates  of  the  prophecies  is  from  Jahn's  Ger- 
man work,  (with  which  Eichhorn  agrees,)  with  a  single  addition  from 
De  Wette. 

Under  Josiah.  Under  Zedekiah. 

c.  iii.  6.  without  year.  c.  xxi.  without  year. 

xxiv.  beginning  of  his  reign. 
Under  Jehoiakim.  xxvii.  beginning  of  his  reign. 

e.  XXV.  fourth  year.  xxviii.  fourth  year. 

xxvi.  beginning  of  his  reign.  xxix,  without  year. 

XXXV.  without  year.  xxxii.  tenth  year, 

xxxvi.  fourth  year,  xxxiii.  tenth  year, 

xlv.  fourth  year,  xxxiv.  without  year. 

xxxvii.  without  year, 
xxxviii.  without  year, 
xlix.  34.  beginning  of  his  reign. 
1 — ^li.  fourth  year.  TV.] 

§   137.     Jeremiah  according  to  the  Alexandrine  Version. 

The  order  of  the  prophecies  from  c.  xxv.  15.  to  the  end  of  the 
book  is  entirely  different  in  the  Alexandrine  version  from  that  of  the 
Hebrew  text ;  for  those  against  the  Gentiles,  which  in  the  latter  oc- 
cupy the  last  place,  c.  xlvi — h.,  are  found  in  the  former  afler  xxv.  14, 


390         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

and  ill  a  different  order,  [a]  Further,  not  only  are  many  words  and 
sentences  wanting  in  this  version,  but  also  passages  of  considerable 
length.  See  viii.  10 — 13.  xvi,  6,  6.  xvii.  1 — 4.  xxx.  10,  11.  xxxiii. 
14 — 26.  xxxix.  4 — 13.  xlviii.  40,  41.  45 — 47.  As  these  omissions 
were  observed  by  Jerome  in  the  old  Latin  versions,  which  were  made 
from  the  Alexandrine  at  least  as  early  as  the  second  century,  and  are 
mentioned  also  by  Origen  (Ep.  ad  Afric.  p.  226.);  it  is  evident  that 
they  are  of  great  antiquity,  older  than  the  time  of  Christ,  or  even  than 
the  Alexandrine  translation.  All  of  them  cannot  be  explained  as  er- 
rors of  transcribers,  for  both  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  copies  exhibit 
an  intention  at  least  to  follow  a  particular  plan. 

In  order  to  account  for  this  twofold  series  of  prophecies,  and  for 
these  omissions  of  the  Alexandrine  version,  several  hypotheses  have 
been  formed.  Eichhorn  supposes  that  Jeremiah  prepared  a  twofold 
edition  of  his  prophecies,  and  that  the  second,  which  we  have  in  the 
Hebrew  text    was  more  complete  than  the  other    from  which  the 

Alexandrine  version  proceeded. It  is  the  opinion  of  John  D.  Mich- 

aelis  that  the  second  was  the  more  accurate,  and  that  our  Hebrew 
text  contains  interpolations.  But  both  these  opinions  are  at  variance 
with  the  character  of  Jeremiah,  who  was  not  fond  of  writing,  and 
when  divinely  commanded  to  record  his  prophecies  did  not  write  him- 
self, but  dictated  to  Baruch.  Besides,  in  his  second  edition  the 
prophet  would  have  taken  pains  to  secure  an  arrangement  of  his  pro- 
phecies, which  should  not  afterwards  have  been  disturbed  again  in 

both  editions. -^pohn*  contends  that  the  Alexandiine  translator 

has  rendered  six  places,  which  in  the  original  occur  twice  in  one  ver- 
sion only  for  the  sake  of  brevity,  and  for  the  same  reason  has  omitted 
other  places.  But  this  supposition  cannot  be  reconciled  with  omis- 
sions arising  from  similar  terminations,  as  xxxix.  4 — 13.  xxvii.  12 — 
14. 18,  21  vii.  27.  xxv.  14.  xlviii.  45—47.  lii.  15.  It  is  plain  there- 
fore that  all  the  omissions  cannot  be  ascribed  to  one  and  the  same 
cause,  but  that  some  arose  from  the  negligence  of  the  translator, 
others  from  the  carelessness  of  transcribers,  and  others  from  interpo- 
lations of  the  Hebrew  text.     In  this  manner  perhaps  two  recensions 

[In  the  preface,  p.  1 — 12,  to  his  work  entitled — Jeremias  vates  e  versione  Judae- 
orum  Alexandrinorum  ac  reliquorum  interpretum  Graecorum  emendatus,  notisquc 
Titicis  illustratus,  Lipsiae,  1794.) 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


391 


were  produced,  one  interpolated  in  Babylonia,  and  remaining  in  our 
Hebrew  text ;  and  the  other  in  Palestine,  which  omitted  something, 
and  which,  having  been  afterwards  brought  to  Egypt  was  the  original 
from  which  the  Alexandrine  version  was  composed.  On  all  these 
points  I  shall  speak  more  fully  in  Apend.  Herm.  Fasc.  II.* 

[a)  The  following  tables  (the  first  from  Jahn's  German  work,  the 
second  from  Eichhorn's  Einleit.  {  542  a.)  exhibit  the  differences  be- 
tween the  arrangement  of  the  Hebrew  text  and  that  ol  the  Alexandrine 
version,  and  will  be  found  useful  to  the  student  of  the  writings  of  this 
prophet. 


LXX. 

c.  XXV.  15—21. 
xxvi. 
xxvii. 
xxvixi. 
xxix. 

XXX,  1 — 5. 

XXX.  5 — Jl. 

XXX.  11—16. 

xxxi. 

xxxii. 

xxxiii. 

xxxiv. 

XXXV. 

XXX  vi. 

XXX  vii. 

xxxviii. 

xxxix. 

xl. 

xli. 

xlii. 

xliii. 

xlir. 

xlv. 

xlvi. 

xlvii. 

xlviii. 

slix. 


Hebrew. 

c.  xlix.  34—39. 

xlvi. 

1. 

li. 
C  xlvii,  1—7. 
t  xlix,  7—22. 

xlix.  1 — 5. 

xlix.  28—34. 

xlix.  23—28. 

xlviii.  1 — 45. 

XXV.  15—38. 

xxvi, 

xxvii.  2 — ^19. 

xxviii. 

xxix. 

XXX, 

xxxi. 
xxxii, 
xxxiii. 
xxxiv. 

XXXV. 

XXX  vi, 

xxxvii. 

sxxviii. 

xxxix. 

xl. 

xli, 

xlii. 


*  [Comp.  also  the  Germ.  Introductiou,  p.  667—669.    2V.j 


392 


PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


1. 

xliii. 

li.  1—30. 

xliv. 

li.  31— 3S. 

xlv. 

Ui. 

Hi. 

Hebrew. 

LXX. 

«.  XXV.  1 — 14. 

c.  XXV.  1 — 14, 

XXV.  15—38. 

xxxii. 

xxvi. 

xxxiii. 

xxvii.  1—19. 

xxxiv. 

xxvii.  19—22. 

viranting. 

xxviii. 

XXXV. 

xxix. 

xxxvi. 

XXX. 

xxxvii. 

xxxi. 

xxxviii. 

xxxii. 

xxxix. 

xxxiii.  1 — 14. 

xl. 

xxxiii.  14 — 25. 

wanting. 

xxxiv. 

xli. 

XXXV. 

xlii. 

xxxvi. 

xliii. 

xxxvii. 

xliv. 

xxxviii. 

xlv. 

xxxix.  1—3.  13—18. 

xlvi. 

xxxix.  4 — 14. 

wanting. 

xl. 

xlvii. 

xli. 

xlviii. 

xlii. 

xlix. 

xliii. 

1. 

xliv. 

li.  1—31. 

xlv. 

li.  31—35. 

xlvi. 

xxvi. 

xlvii. 

xxix.  1 — 7. 

xlviii.  1 — 46. 

xxxi. 

xlviii.  45 — 47. 

wanting. 

xlix.  1—5. 

XXX.  1—5. 

xlix.  7—22. 

xxix.  7 — 22. 

xlix.  23—27. 

XXX.  11—16. 

xlix.  28—34. 

XXX.  5—11. 

xlix.  35—39. 

XXV.  15—21. 

1. 

xxvii. 

li. 

xxviii. 

lii. 

lii. 

TrA 


•4*^ 


>>F    THE    DLU    TESTAMEM.  39!i 

§  138.     Respecting  the  Author  of  the  Lamentations. 

The  Book  of  Lamentations,  wliich  in  Hebrew  bears  the  title  of 
nD'K,  from  the  word  with  which  it  begins,  in  Greek  called  e^vivoi,  and 

in  Latin,  Lamentationes,  is  the  work  of  Jeremiah.  This  is  attested 
by  the  most  ancient  and  uniform  tradition,  and  is  confirmed  by  the 
subject  of  the  book,  and  by  its  language  and  style.  The  events  which 
Jeremiah  had  predicted  in  his  prophecies  as  about  to  take  place,  in 
his  lamentations  he  deplores  as  having  come  to  pass  ;  as  for  instance, 
the  imposture  of  false  prophets  who  were  seducing  the  people  with 
vam  hopes  (Lam.  ii.  14.  iv.  12.  s.),  the  folly  of  trusting  for  aid  to 
allies  (Lam.  i.  19.  iv.  17.  comp.  Jer.  xv.  15.  ss.  xxvii.  22.  4 — 11.), 
the  destruction  of  the  city  and  its  inhabitants,  and  the  hatred  and 
calamities  which  he  himself  experienced,  and  of  which  he  had  so 
frequently  complained  in  his  prophecies.  The  language,  like  that  of 
the  prophecies,  is  intermingled  with  Chaldee  words  and  forms,  and 
the  style  is  of  a  melancholy  character,  [a] 

[o)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  274.  anm.  c)  gives  the  following  references. 
Lam.  i.  15.  ii.  13.  comp.  Jer.  xiv.  17.  xlvi.  11.  ;  Lam.  ii.  22.  comp.  Jer. 
tI.  25.  X.  3.  10;  Lam.  i.  11.  comp.  Jer.  xv.  19.  Chaldaisms  ;  poDljy. 

i.  4  ;  N3tif%  iv.  1.  &c.— TV.] 

§  139.  Subject  of  the  Lamentations. 

Some  authors,  as  Josephus  and  Jerome  among  the  ancients,  and 
Michaelis  and  Dathe  among  the  moderns,  have  maintained  that  these 
mournful  poems  were  composed  on  occasion  of  the  death  of  Josiah. 
Others,  both  ancient  and  modern,  have  supposed  that  it  is  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  which  is  lamented.  But  upon  a  careful  examina- 
tion of  the  whole  matter,  it  appears  that  the  book  does  not  relate  to 
a  single  subject,  but  consists  of  five  different  poems,  in  which  the 
same  number  of  calamitous  events  are  deplored.  These  are  as  fol- 
lows :  1 )  the  carrying  away  of  king  Jehoiakim,  with  ten  thousand  of 
the  principal  Hebrews,  c.  i.  comp.  H  Kings  xxiv.  8 — 17,  i\  Chron. 

xxxvi.  9,10. 2)  The  assauh  of  Jerusalem,  c.ii. -3)  Thecalami- 

ties  undergone  by  the  prophet,  c.  iii. 4)  The  overthrow  of  Jerusa- 

50 


394    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

lem,  the  carrying  away  of  king  Zedekiah,  and  the  slaughter  of  the 

Hebrews,  c.  iv. 6)     The  wretched  condition  of  the  people  and  of 

Jerusalem  after  the  destruction  of  the  city,  c.  v.  See  Horrers 
Neue  Bearbeitung  der  Klagegesange  Jeremia's,  1784. 

§   140.     Style  of  the  Lamentations. 

These  mournful  poems  express  the  feelings  of  the  prophet  in  the 
very  order  in  which  they  arose  in  his  mind.  We  must  not,  therefore, 
expect  to  find  in  them  any  particular  arrangement.  The  style,  as 
the  poetic  character  of  the  composition  required,  is  somewhat  more 
elevated  than  that  of  the  prophecies.  The  tropes  correspond  with 
the  sorrowful  nature  of  the  subject.  The  initial  letters  of  the  verses 
in  the  first  four  chapters  follow  the  order  of  the  alphabet,  but  yet  in 
such  a  manner  that  in  the  third  chapter  each  letter  commences  three 
successive  verses.  The  fifth  chapter  corresponds  in  the  number  of 
its  verses  with  the  number  of  the  letters  of  the  alphabet,  but  the  order 
of  the  initial  letters  is  neglected.  A  remarkable  transposition  of  the 
verses  which  begin  with  Phe  and  Am  is  observable  in  ii.  16,  17.  iii. 
46 — 52,  and  iv.  16,  17  ;  which  is  not  found  in  i.  16,  17,  nor  in  other 
alphabetical  poems.  No  sufficient  reason  has  been  assigned  for  this  ; 
probably  the  verses  have  by  some  mischance  or  other  been  misplaced. 

§  141.     Age  of  EzeMel. 
Ezekiel,  the  son  of  Buzi,  ""i^S  {3  Sxprns  of  a  sacerdotal  family,  was 

carried  away  with  king  Jehoiachin  and  ten  thousand  other  Jew?,  to 
Mesopotamia,  on  the  banks  of  the  river  Chebar.  In  the  fifth  year  after 
his  removal,  the  seventh  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and 
594  B.  C.  he  was  called  to  the  prophetic  office,  i.  2.,  which  he  exer- 
cised from  that  time  during  at  least  twenty-seven  years,  to  the  year 
567  B.  C,  xxix.  17.  The  year  of  his  call  is  mentioned  i.  1,  as  the 
30th,  meaning  from  the  commencement  of  the  great  Chaldean  mo- 
narchy, which  began  624  B.  C.  in  the  18th  year  of  Josiah,  the  same 
that  was  remarkable  for  the  discovery  of  the  ancient  copy  of  the  law 
of  Moses.  Ezekiel,  therefore,  was  in  part  contemporary  with  Jere- 
miah, and  the  contents  of  his  book  remarkably  agree  with  the  writings 
of  that  prophet. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEiM.  395 

§  142.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ezekiel. 

[In  the  fifth  year  of  his  imprisonment,  Ezekiel  receives  a  divine 
commission  to  prophesy  to  the  Hebrews,  whether  they  would  regard 
liim  or  not.  In  the  vision,  a  roll  written  within  and  without  with 
lamentations  is  handed  to  him,  and  he  is  commanded  to  eat  it,  iri 
token  of  the  revelations  which  were  to  be  communicated  to  him. 
He  comes  then  to  Tel-abib,  on  the  Chebar,  where,  after  seven  days, 
he  is  again  called  to  the  prophetic  office,  and  appointed  a  watchman 
to  see  and  announce  the  coming  events,  i.  1 — iii.  21. 

It  is  probable  that  immediately  after  this  call  Ezekiel  received  the 
command  to  portray  Jerusalem  upon  a  tile,  and  to  lay  siege  to  this 
delineation,  while  he  lay  before  it  on  his  left  side  three  hundred  and 
ninety  days,  and  forty  on  his  right,  at  the  same  time  living  sparingly 
upon  a  wretched  diet  and  a  limited  supply  of  water.  Thus  he  was 
to  represent  the  actual  siege  of  the  city,  and  the  famine  which  should 
prevail,  the  number  of  days  being  designed  to  mark  out  the  years 
during  which  Israel  and  Judah  respectively  had  sinned  ;  and  the  kind 
of  bread  which  he  was  commanded  to  use  being  an  emblem  of  the 
impure  food  which  the  .lews  would  be  obhged  to  eat  when  dispersed 
among  the  Heathen,  iii.  22 — iv.  17.  He  is  also  directed,  v.  1 — 4,  to 
cut  off  the  hair  of  his  head  and  beard,  to  burn  a  third  part  of  it,  to 
smite  a  third  part  with  a  sword,  and  to  scatter  the  remainder  to  the 
wind,  hewing  on  it  with  the  sword.  A  few  hairs  of  this  last  third 
part  he  was  to  take,  and  bind  in  the  skirt  of  his  garment,  and  at  last 
to  throw  some  even  of  these  into  the  lire.  Thus  a  third  of  the  inha- 
bitants of  Jerusalem  were  to  be  destroyed  by  famine  and  pestilence, 
another  third  by  the  sword,  and  the  rest  to  be  dispersed  and  pur- 
sued with  the  sword,  v.  5 — 17,  The  prophet  continues  this  subject 
in  the  sixth  and  seventh  chapters,  with  the  addition  that  Jerusalem 
shall  be  destroyed. 

Chaps,  viii — xi.  In  the  sixth  year,  on  the  fifth  day  of  the  sixth 
month,  Ezekiel  is  transported  in  a  vision  to  the  temple  at  Jerusalem, 
and  sees  there  various  kinds  of  idolatry  practised.  Those  persons 
who  are  to  be  delivered,  are  by  divine  command  marked  on  the  fore- 
head, and  the  others  are  put  to  death,  and  burning  coals  scattered 
over  the  citv.     Two  men  who  have  given  bad  advice,  (an  emblem  of 


396  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

the  counsellors  who  seduced  Zedekiah  to  revolt,)  are  brought  to  the 
borders  of  the  country  and  there  put  to  death.  Comp.  Jer.  lii.  10. 
This  portion  concludes  with  the  promise,  that  those  who  had  been 
carried  away  captive  along  with  Jeconiah,  should  return,  and  take 
possession  of  the  laud,  abandon  idolatry  and  live  under  the  divine 
protection. 

Chap.  xii.  The  prophet  is  commanded  to  break  a  hole  through 
the  wall  of  his  house,  and  to  remove  his  furniture,  carrying  it  on  his 
back,  at  twilight,  in  the  sight  of  the  people,  at  the  same  time  covering 
his  face.  This  was  a  sign  to  Zedekiah,  who  should  break  through 
the  wall  and  escape  at  night,  but  be  taken  prisoner  and  brought  to 
the  land  of  the  Chaldeans,  which,  however,  he  should  not  see  though 
he  should  die  there.  The  remainder  were  to  be  destroyed  or  scat- 
tered. Doubters  respecting  the  accomplishment  of  those  prophecies 
are  then  assured  that  they  will  certainly  and  speedily  be  fulfilled. 
With  this  is  connected  a  threatening  against  the  false  prophets  and 
fortune-tellers  denounced  in  the  thirteenth  chapter. 

In  the  fourteenth  chapter,  some  of  the  principal  men,  who  in  their 
hearts  were  devoted  to  idolatry,  are  threatened  with  punishment ;  and 
the  prophet  announces  that  although  he  had  determined  not  to  spare 
the  guilty,  yet  in  Jerusalem  a  remnant  should  be  preserved,  in  whose 
conduct  the  exiles  should  see  the  viciousness  of  the  people,  and  ac- 
knowledge the  justice  of  their  punishment.  This  is  also  represented 
in  c.  XV.  under  the  figure  of  a  vine  tree,  the  wood  of  which,  notwith- 
standing the  excellence  of  the  tree  itself,  cannot  be  employed  like 
that  of  other  trees  of  an  inferior  character,  to  make  the  most  trifling 
article  of  furniture,  but  is  fit  for  nothing  but  the  flames.  Thus  also 
the  citizens  of  Jerusalem  are  useless  ;  they  are  destined  to  punish- 
ment.  In  c.  xvi.  this  viciousness  is  depicted  in  much  stronger  co- 
lours. Jerusalem  is  represented  as  a  Canaanitish  female,  exposed 
immediately  after  birth,  but  taken  by  God,  brought  up,  clothed  in 
splendid  garments,  nourished  with  the  most  costly  viands,  taken  at 
last  as  his  bride  and  becoming  a  mother.  But  she  grows  proud,  dis- 
solute, wanton,  and  at  length  an  adulteress  devoid  of  shame,  lavishing 
upon  her  lovers  the  presents  which  her  husband  had  given  her,  and 
preparing  the  children  which  she  had  borne  him  to  be  devoured.  She 
shall  therefore  be  stripped,  and  her  lovers  shall  stone  her  and  cut  her 


UF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  397 

Jinibs  in  pieces.  The  meaning  of  the  allegory  is,  that  Jerusalem,  a 
Canaanitish  city,  was  taken  by  the  Deity  as  his  residence,  and  embel- 
lished ;  but  since  it  has  become  so  idolatrous,  it  shall  be  destroyed. 
This  allegorical  female  is  then  compared  with  her  elder  sister  Sama- 
ria and  with  her  younger  sister  Sodom,  (that  is,  Moab  and  Ammon,) 
whose  dissoluteness  she  far  exceeds,  and  therefore  shall  be  severely 
punished. 

[In  chapter  xvii.  the  prophet  utters  a  parable  of  a  vine  planted  and 
carefully  cultivated  by  an  eagle,  which  bent  its  roots  and  shot  forth 
its  branches  towards  another  eagle,  and  is  therefore  threatened  with 
extirpation,  1  — 10.  By  this  is  represented  the  revolt  of  the  Jewish 
king  from  Nebuchadnezzar  with  whom  he  had  made  a  treaty,  to  the 
king  of  Egypt,  for  which  exemplary  punishment  is  denounced,  1 1 — 21, 
This  is  followed  by  a  promise  of  a  great  king  hereafter  to  arise,  and 
to  exercise  royal  authority  in  Israel,  22 — 24.*      Tr  ] 

Chapter  xviii.  exposes  the  erroneous  opinion  that  posterity  were 
punished  for  the  sins  of  their  ancestors  which  was  expressed  by  the 
proverb — "  the  fathers  have  eaten  sour  grapes  and  the  children's 
teeth  are  set  on  edge." 

The  nineteenth  chapter  contains  two  melancholy  poems  relating  to 
the  two  captive  kings,  Jehoahazin  Egypt,  and  Jehoiachin  in  Babylon. 
They  are  represented  as  two  young  lions,  taken  in  the  toils  of  the 
hunters.  The  nation  is  then  introduced  under  the  figure  of  a  flou- 
rishing vine,  scorched  by  the  east  wind,  then  torn  up  and  transplanted 
in  the  wilderness. 

Chap.  XX.  In  the  seventh  year,  on  the  tenth  of  the  fifth  month, 
some  of  the  principal  exiles,  who  had  come  to  the  prophet  to  inquire 
of  the  Lord,  receive  instead  of  an  answer,  a  repetition  of  former 
threats.  Like  their  fathers,  they  also  are  refractory,  and  bent  upon 
assimilating  themselves  to  the  Heathen.  But  this  shall  not  be.  Yet 
shall  they  be  preserved  and  brought  back  again  to  Palestine,  where 
they  shall  become  steady  worshippers  of  God. 

In  c.  XX.  45 — xxi.  32.  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is  represented 
under  the  image  of  a  forest  wrapped  in  flames.  The  prophet  ex- 
plains this. When  Nebuchadnezzar  comes  to  the  place  where  his 

*  [This  brief  analysis  of  the  seventeenth  chapter  has  been  added  by  the  translators, 
as  the  author,  probably  through  inadvertence,  has  passed  it  over  unnoticed.     Tr.] 


398  PAKTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  liOOK 

road  divides,  the  one  branch  leading  to  Rabbath  Ammon,  in  rebelhon 
because  of  its  alhance  with  Jerusalem  and  Egypt,  and  the  other  to  Je- 
rusalem, he  consults  the  lot  of  arrows,  the  soothsayers  and  the  tera- 
phim,  respecting  the  road  most  proper  to  be  taken,  and  the  answer 
directs  him  to  Jerusalem.  Zedekiah  must- lose  his  crown,  and  all  be 
lost  until  he  comes  to  whom  the  government  belongs,  and  to  whom 
God  will  give  it  (comp.  Gen.  xhx.  10.).  Although  the  Ammonites 
would  for  this  time  be  spared,  destruction  should  afterwards  overtake 
them. 

In  c.  xxii.  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  are  upbraided  with  their 
crimes,  and  threatened  with  severe  punishment  on  account  of  them. 

The  twenty-third  chapter  represents  Samaria  and  Jerusalem  under 
the  image  of  two  sisters,  Aholah  (nSnx)  and  Aholibah  (n^'Snx),  both 

T  T|  T  T    .   t;|t 

of  whom  have  been  harlots  from  their  youth.  The  elder  is  punished 
as  she  deserves,  but  this  only  makes  her  sister  worse,  and  therefore 
she  also  shall  be  punished.  The  Chaldeans  shall  cut  off  her  nose 
and  ears  ;  she  shall  be  stoned  and  hewed  in  pieces,  her  children  put 
to  death  and  her  houses  burned.  That  is,  as  Samaria  has  been  de- 
stroyed, so  also  shall  Jerusalem  be  destroyed,  and  its  inhabitants  slain 
and  dispersed. 

Chap.  xxiv.  In  the  ninth  year-  on  the  tenth  day  of  the  tenth 
month,  Ezekiel  receives  the  divine  commission  to  note  down  that 
day,  because  then  Nebuchadnezzar  began  to  besiege  Jerusalem. 
Comp.  Jer.  lii.  4.  The  city  is  compared  to  a  boiling  pot,  filled  with 
flesh,  out  of  which  one  piece  after  another  is  to  be  drawn.  The 
brazen  vessel  is  thereby  so  full  of  rust,  that  it  must  be  cleansed, 
(made  glowing  hot  and  cooled  in  water  )  but  even  this  operation  does 
not  completely  cleanse  it.  By  this  image  he  declares,  that  the  peo- 
ple of  Jerusalem  would  not  be  entirely  reformed  by  all  the  afflictions 

of  the  siege After  this  the  prophet  loses  his  wife,  and  is  prolii- 

bited  by  divine  command  from  showing  any  sign  of  grief.  By  this 
emblem  it  is  denoted  that  the  sanctuary  shall  be  destroyed,  and  that 
the  exiles  shall  not  dare  utter  a  lamentation,  through  fear  of  the  con- 
querors. As  a  prognostic  of  this  event,  the  prophet  is  not  to  speak 
until  the  messenger  shall  arrive  witii  an  account  of  the  conquest  of 
the  citv. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  399 

Chap.  XXV — xxxii.  These  chapters  contain  prophecies  agahist  fo- 
reign nations,  principally  those  that  exulted  at  the  calamities  which 

had  befallen  the  Hebrews. 1)  Against  the  Ammonites,  xxv.  1 — 7, 

and  the  Moabites,  8— U. 2)  Against   Edom,  v.  12—14. -3) 

Against  the  Philistines,  v.  15 — 17. 4)  Against  Tyre.     In  c.  xxvi. 

its  conquest  and  destruction  by  Nebuchadnezzar  are  predicted  ;  then 
follows  a  lamentation  on  account  of  the  fate  of  this  celebrated  city,  c. 
xxvii,  which  is  succeeded  by  a  denunciation  of  the  downfal  of  its 
proud  king,  xxviii.  1 — 19.,  and  of  punishment  to  be  inflicted  upon 
Zidon,  V.  20 — 24.     A  promise  of  return  to  the  Hebrews   v.  25,  26, 

concludes  this  portion. 5)  Against  Egypt,  c.  xxix — xxxii,  in  six 

parts. — Its  conquest  and  future  depression,  xxix.  1 — 16; — its  inva- 
sion and  devastation  by  Nebuchadnezzar  immediately  after  the  cap- 
ture of  Tyre,  xxix.  17 — xxx.  19  ; — the  dispersion  of  tlie  inhabitants, 
XXX.  20 — 26  ; — the  fall  of  the  king  under  the  image  of  a  large  cedar, 
felled  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  cast  into  the  kingdom  of  the  dead, 
xxxi  ; — a  lamentation  on  the  fall  of  Pharaoh  and  the  destruction  of 
Egypt,  xxxii.  1 — 16  ; — and  another  lamentation  at  the  conducting  of 
Egypt  into  the  empire  of  the  dead  to  rest  with  Assyria,  Elam,  and 
other  nations,  v.  17 — 32. 

In  c.  xxxiii,  1 — 20  the  duty  of  a  prophet  is  represented  by  that  of 
a  watchman,  who  is  to  declare,  under  pain  of  severe  punishment, 
what  he  sees  at  a  distance,  however  calamitous  it  may  be.  God  is 
ready  to  withhold  the  announced  evil  on  condition  of  repentance  ;  but 
if  the  sinner  relapse  into  vice,  his  former  repentance  shall  not  avail 
to  deliver  him  ;  as,  on  the  contrary  his  previous  crimes  shall  not  sub- 
ject him  to  punishment  if  he  sincerely  abandon  them.  This  is  the 
answer  to  the  complaint  of  the  Hebrews  that  God's  proceedings 
against  them  were  not  just. 

Chap,  xxxiii.  21 — 33.  In  the  twelfth  year,  on  the  fifth  of  the  tenth 
month,  the  account  of  the  destruction  of  the  city  is  brought.  On 
the  previous  evening  the  prophet  had  again  resumed  the  subject,  on 
which  he  had,  since  c.  xxiv.,  been  silent.  He  denounces  pun- 
ishment of  the  crimes,  on  account  of  which  the  country  promised  to 
Abraham  should  be  wasted,  and  the  inhabitants  exterminated.  Then 
follow  in  c.  xxxiv.  a  denunciation  against  the  shepherds  or  kings,  who 
seek  their  own  welfare  and  not  that  of  the  community,  and  a  promise 


100    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  ROOK 

that  God  will  bring  his  people  back  again,  become  their  king  himself, 
and  set  up  the  second  David  or  Messiah. 

The  35th  chapter  contains  a  prophecy  of  the  desolation  of  the 
CQuntry  of  Seir  or  of  the  Edomites,  who  had  rejoiced  at  the  calami- 
ties of  the  Hebrews.  These,  says  the  prophet,  c.  xxxvi.,  will  God 
bring  back  and  multiply.  This  return  and  the  restoration  of  the 
state  are  represented  xxxvii.  1 — 14,  in  a  vision,  as  a  resurrection 
from  the  dead.  Then,  ».  15 — 28,  shall  Judah  and  Israel  be  indis- 
solubly  united  as  one  people,  maintain  the  worship  of  God,  live  under 
his  protection,  and  receive  the  second  David  as  their  king. 

Chapters  xxxviii.  xxxix,  predict  the  expedition  of  Gog,  the  king 
of  Magog,  against  the  returned  Hebrews  when  the  country  is  to 
imdergo  a  great  revolution,  Gog  being  conquered  and  sustaining  a 
great  slaughter.  This  is  an  image,  somewhat  strongly  delineated,  of 
the  victories  of  the  Maccabees  over  the  Syrians. 

Chaps,  xl — xlviii.  In  these  last  nine  chapters,  the  prophet,  in  the 
beginning  of  the  twenty-fifth  year,  receives  in  a  vision  a  statement  of 
the  magnitude  of  the  temple  and  of  its  parts,  of  the  duties  of  the  Le- 
vites  and  priests,  of  the  greatness  of  Jerusalem  and  its  gates,  of  the 
duties  and  domains  of  the  princes  or  kings,  of  the  boundaries  of  the 
whole  land,  of  its  distribution  among  the  twelve  tribes,  and  of  the 
name  of  the  chief  city  which  should  be  called  rrsty  nins  Jehovah 

T  ^  T      ; 

there.  The  Hebrews  will  then  no  more  relapse  into  idolatry.  Out 
of  the  temple  a  fountain  shall  spring  which,  on  its  progress  to  the 
Dead  Sea,  shall  become  a  large  stream  with  fruitful  trees  on  its 
banks,  and  shall  even  sweeten  the  salt  waters  of  that  sea,  c.  xlvii. 
Comp.  Ps.  xlvi.  5.  Joel  iv.  18.  Zach.  xiv.  8.  It  is  abundantly  evi- 
dent from  this  stream,  which  is  a  figure  of  happiness,  and  from  the 
name  of  the  chief  city,  that  the  whole  description  is  only  an  image  of 
the  certain  restoration  of  the  Hebrews.  The  prophet  sees  the  tem- 
ple already  standing,  Jerusalem  rebuilt,  and  the  land  divided.  Should 
I  venture  to  determine  with  more  particularity  the  period  referred  to, 
it  would  seem  to  me  most  probable,  that  the  representation  is  figura- 
tive of  the  times  of  the  Maccabees,  when  the  country  received  a 
large  accession  by  conquests,  many  of  the  Jews  returned  from  fo- 
reign lands,  and  the  people  lived  under  their  own  kings.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  101 

The  points  in  these  prophecies  which  are  principally  worthy  ol 
attention,  are  the  following.  1)  That  the  prophet,  more  than  one 
hundred  m  !es  distant  from  the  scene,  should  have  announced  the 
beginning  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem  on  the  very  day  it  took  place  ; 
and  like  Jeremiah,  should  have  constantly  predicted  the  conquest  and 

destruction  of  the  city  and  the  carrying  away  of  the  inhabitants. 2) 

That  he  should  have  foreseen  also  the  flight  of  Zedekiah  through  the 
broken  walls  at  night,  together  with  the  circumstances,  that  he  should 
be  overtaken  by  the  Chaldeans,  that  he  should  not  be  slain  but  car- 
ried into  their  country,  which   however  he  should  not  see.     This  was 

verified  by  Nebuchadnezzar's  causing  his  eyes  to  be  put  out. -3) 

That  moreover,  like  Jeremiah,  he  should  plainly  predict  the  return  of 
the  Hebrews  to  their  country,  and  their  perseverance  in  the  worship  of 
God,   events  so  remote  and  in  themselves  improbable,  and  also  the 

conquest  of  Idumea  by  the  Hebrews. 4)  That  he  should  have 

announced  not  only  the  demolition  of  Tyre  to  be  rebuilt  no  more,  (for 
the  new  city  was  founded  upon  an  island,)  but  also  that  its  ruins  should 
be  thrown  into  the  sea  ;  a  prediction  which  Alexander  unconsciously 

verified. 5)  Lastly,  that,  like  Jeremiah,  he  should  have  foretold 

the  advent  of  that  great  Son  of  David  at  a  period  when  David's 
family  were  deprived  of  royal  dignity. 

§  143.     Style  of  Ezekiel. 

The  work  of  Ezekiel  contains  many  visions,  which  are  not  only 
minutely  described  in  all  their  circumstances  and  details,  but  even  in 
some  instances,  repeated.  His  tropes  and  images  do  not  always 
correspond  accurately  with  nature.  Comp.  xvii.  xxiii.  34.  sxix.  7.  [a] 
The  prophet's  style  in  reproving  vice  is  vehement,  indeed,  but  by  no 
means  sublime,  and  it  is  almost  everywhere  prosaic.  His  language  is 
intermingled  with  many  Chaldee  words  and  forms,  as  might  naturall\ 
be  expected  from  his  residence  in  Mesopotamia.     Comp.  Tt^isji  in 

1  wi.  13  TinV,  xvi.  20  ;  nnx  as  an  article  in  i.  15,  and  nn  instead  of 

inN  in  xxxiii.  30  ;  and  many  other  places,  [ft] 

[a)    St.  John,  in  his  Apocalypse,  has  exhibited  many  of  Ezekiel"? 
ffigwes  in  a  manner  much  more  elegant  and  natural. 1 

51 


402  {'ARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

[6)  Gesenics  observes  that  Ezekiel  "  has  probably  the  greatest  pre 
portion  of  grammatical  anomalies  and  errors  of  all  the  writers  in  the  Old 
Testament."  See  his  examination  of  the  language  of  this  prophet ;  Gesch.  . 
der  Heb.  Sprache  und  Schrift,  J  11.  S.  35.  f.  Eichhorn  also,  Einleit. 
J  548,  IV.  Th.  S.  242.  f.,  enters  at  some  length  into  a  consideration  of  the 
language  of  Ezekiel,  for  the  purpose  of  proving  the  identity  of  the  author 
throughout  the  book.     TV.] 

§  144.     Order  of  EzekieVs  Prophecies. 

These  prophecies  have  been  digested  in  the  order  of  time,  as  is 
attested  by  the  titles  ;  so  that  those  which  are  destitute  of  titles  are 
to  be  ascribed  to  the  time  mentioned  in  the  title  next  preceding, 
especially  as  all  the  propliecies  were  prepared  with  particular  care, 
and  were  certainly  recorded  by  the  prophet  previously  to  their  being 
uttered.  Those  only  which  were  pronounced  against  the  Heathen, 
although  collected  in  c.  xxv — xxxii.,  were  not  all  written  at  the  same 
time,  nor  have  they  been  digested  in  chronological  order.  It  is  hardly 
possible  to  remove  this  difficulty,  unless  on  the  supposition,  that  some 
transcriber  inconsiderately  added  those  prophecies  to  xxiv.  27,  where 
Ezekiel  is  said  to  be  silent,  and  in  doing  so,  wrote  them  out  in  the 
order  in  which  he  found  them. [a]  This  will  account  for  the  total 
want  of  arrangement  in  this  portion,  and  for  the  omission  through 
forgetfulness  of  the  predictions  against  the  Edomites  in  xxxv.,  and 
against  Gog  and  Magog  in  xxxviii.  xxxix. 

[a)  Comp.  xxvi.  xxx.  xxxi.  which  belong  to  the  period  of  his  silence.] 
§  145.     Of  the  last  nine  chapters  of  Ezekiel. 

Some  writers  deny  that  the  last  nine  chapters  are  to  be  attributed 
to  Ezekiel.  [a]  But  the  arguments  on  which  this  hypothesis  rest  are 
by  no  means  sufficient  to  sustain  it. — — 1)  The  obscurity  of  these 
chapters  is  urged.  But  certainly  this  is  not  at  variance  with  the 
opinion  that  they  were  written  by  Ezekiel,  for  many  other  parts  of 
his  work  are  less  perspicuous,  not  to  say,  that  descriptions  of  this 
kind,  particularly  of  buildings,  can  scarcely  be  made  very  intelhgible 

without  the  aid  of  drawings. 2)     These  chapters  are  supposed 

to  contain  commands  which  were  disregarded  by  the  Hebrews  after 
their  return-  and  therefore  it  is  inferred  that  they  did  not  then  exirtj 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEN  i  .  M'-i 

or  at  least  were  not  ascribed  to  Ezekiel.  But  this  supposition  is  un- 
founded :  for  those  chapters  do  not  contain  commands,  but  an  em- 
blematic  or  figurative  representation  intended  to  confirm  the  certainty 

of  the  return,  and  the  re-establishment  of  divine  worship. 3)     It 

is  further  objected,  that  the  prophet  could  not  possibly  retain  in  me- 
mory the  numbers  of  so  many  measurements  as  were  perceived  by 
him  in  his  vision.  But  this  is  of  little  weight  ;  for  as  the  impressions 
of  the  visions  were  the  more  vehement  on  account  of  the  outward 
senses  being  at  rest,  there  would  be  the  less  difficulty  in  retaining 
them  in  the  memory.  Besides  there  are  persons  who  commit  num- 
bers to  memory  with  great  facility,  and  if  the  objectors  to  these  pro- 
phecies allow  that  visions  constitute  merely  the  dress  and  form  in 
which  the  prophets  announce  their  predictions,[6]  there  would  have 

been  no  need  of  memory  in  the  case.- 4)     Josephus,  Ant.   X.  v. 

1.,  attributes  to  Ezekiel  two  books  of  the  Babylonian  Captivity.  But 
as  by  the  second  book  of  Ezekiel,  he  means  the  last  nine  chapters, 
how  is  it  possible  thence  to  infer  that  Ezekiel  is  not  their  author  ? 
There  is  no  necessity  therefore  to  apply  the  language  of  Josephus  to 
Jeremiah,[c]  which  can  not  be  done  without  violence  to  the  series  of 
the  discourse. 

CoERODY,  I.  Th.  S.  106,  conjectures,  that  some  Hebrew,  who  re- 
turned later  than  the  great  body  of  his  brethren,  made  up  these  chap- 
ters, in  order  to  effect  a  new  distribution  of  the  country  by  which  he 
might  acquire  a  portion  for  himself  But  this  conjecture  is  altoge- 
ther worthless,  for  no  such  impostor  would  have  written  so  largely  and 
in  such  a  manner  of  the  temple  and  of  the  division  of  the  country  among 
the  tribes,  and  at  the  same  time  forget  entirely  the  distribution  among 
individuals. 

Nothing  therefore  can  be  established  in  opposition  to  the  genuine- 
ness of  these  prophecies  ;  and  it  is  confirmed  by  their  contents.  The 
visions,  the  manner  of  conveying  reproof  the  multitude  of  circumstan- 
tial particulars,  the  character  of  the  language  and  style,  in  all  which 
respects  Ezekiel  is  remarkably  distinguished  from  other  writers, 
prove  that  he  must  have  been  the  author  of  these  chapters.  No  imi- 
tation could  possibly  have  been  so  successful. 

[a)  This  suspicion  was  first  advanced  by  Oeder  in  his  Freye  Unter- 
?nchun»  ueber  einige  Biicher  des  A.  T..  I77t.  and  subsequently  main- 


404  PARTICULAR  IxNTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOK 

taincd  by  G.  T.  L.  Vogel  in  his  edition  of  Oeder's  work,  mit  Zugabe 
und  Anmerkungen,  and  by  Corrodi  in  his  Versuch  einer  Beleuchtung 
der  Gesch.  des  Kanons.     It  is  rejected  with  scorn  by  f'.iCHHORW,  Einleit. 
5  549.  IV.  Th.  S.  248.  ff.,  and  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  223.  ann.  a. 
and  Bertholdt,  S.  1491.  ff.     TV.] 

[b)  This  is  an  argumentum  ad  hominem,  resorted  to  by  Jahn,  as  suffi- 
cient to  confute  his  antagonists,  who,  in  all  probability,  maintained  on 
this  subject  opinions  similar  to  those  of  Eichhorn.  This  latter  writer  ex- 
plicitly avows  his  sentiments  as  follows  :  "  All  ecstasies  and  visions  are, 
in  my  opinion,  mere  poetic  fiction :  and  [he  refers  particularly  to  those  of 
Ezekiel]  another  writer  of  a  different  age  and  of  a  different  disposition, 
or  gifted  with  less  fancy  and  invention,  would  have  expressed  the  same 
ideas  in  an  entirely  different  manner."     Einleit.  Th.  IV.  S.  257.     TV.] 

[c)  As  is  done  by  EICHHOR^,  Einleit.  §  540,  549.     TV.] 

§   146.     Whether  Ezekiel  wrote  the  Prophecies  against  the  Heathen. 

An  anonymous  writer  in  the  Monthly  Magazine  and  British  Regis- 
ter, for  March,  1798,  p.  189,  denies  that  the  prophecies  in  c.  x.w — 
xxxii,  XXXV,  xxxvi,  and  xxxviii,  xxxix,  are  Ezekiel's.  His  reasons 
are  so  exceedingly  trifling,  that  they  are  not  worthy  of  refutation. 
Nor  indeed  is  this  necessary,  for  these  very  parts  of  the  book  con- 
tain evidence  that  they  are  the  work  of  this  prophet  ;  very  many  par- 
ticulars which  Ezekiel  is  accustomed  to  introduce  elsewhere  are  found 
in  these  prophecies  ;  as,  for  instance,  the  designation  of  the  year,  the 
month  and  the  day,  on  which  a  revelation  was  communicated  ;  the  re- 
markable phraseology  son  of  man  corresponding  with  the  usage  in 
the  Aramaean  dialect ;  the  forms,  set  thy  face  towards  or  against — 
prophesy  against — hear  the  woi'd  of  Jehovah — thus  saith  the  Lord 
Jehovah — tlie  ivord  of  Jehovah  came  to  me — they  shall  know  that  I  am 
Jehovah — take  up  a  lamentation  for.  In  these  chapters,  as  in  c.  i — 
xxiv,  the  terms  Til  and  N't^i  are  frequently  applied  to  kings,  the 

same  devices  for  conducting  sieges,  p''n,  a  circumvallation,  and  hSSd, 

a  mxmnd,  are  mentioned,  comp.  c.  xxvi.  8.  with  iv.  2.  xvii.  17.  xsi. 
27.  (22),  and  in  fine  the  same  particularity  and  multitude  of  circum- 
stances occur.  Indeed  xxviii.  14.  contains  a  reference  to  the  vision 
mentioned  in  i.  13.  x.  2.  If  the  mentioning  the  regions  of  the  de- 
parted more  frequently  than  is  usual  (see  xxvi.  20.  xxxi.  14 — 17. 


t. 


UF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  405 

vxxii.  18 — 32.)  would  seem  to  indicate  a  foreign  origin,  it  must  be 
considered  that  the  subject  required  it,  and  it  can  never  be  alleged 
with  any  weight  as  a  proof  that  these  portions  ot  Ezekiel's  prophecies 
differ  in  character  from  the  remainder. 

§  147.     Time  of  Daniel. 
Daniel,  '?S'':i,  of  noble,  if  not  of  royal  extraction^  was  carried  by 

Nebuchadnezzar  as  a  prisoner  to  Babylon,  when  a  youth,  together 
with  other  children  of  the  king  and  nobles  in  the  fourth  year  of 
.Tehoiakim  B.  C.  606.  He  was  taught  the  language  and  sciences  of 
the  Chaldeans,  and  then  employed  in  the  service  of  the  king,  i.  1 — 4. 
Comp.  II  Kings  xxw.  8.  Jer.  xxv.  1,  11.  12,  At  Babylon  he  was 
distinguished  by  the  Chaldee  name  Belteshazzar  "yimt^'ohj,  and  with 

his  three  friends,  Hananiah,  Mishael  and  Azariah  observed  the  Mo- 
saic law  as  far  as  was  p  acticable  in  their  situation,  and  lived  in  the 
most  pious  manner  so  that  in  the  thiiteenth  year  of  the  captivity,  he 
is  mentioned  by  Ezekiel,  xiv.  14  18,  20,  in  connexion  with  Noah  and 
Job.  After  three  years  of  instruction,  he  stood  before  the  king-  that 
is,  he  obtained  some  office  in  the  court  and  excelled  in  wisdom,  and  par- 
ticularly in  sagacity  in  the  interpretation  of  visions  and  dreams,  and 
is  therefore  celebrated  by  Ezekiel,  xxviii  3  as  the  wisest  of  his  con- 
temporaries. In  time,  most  probably  after  all  the  expeditions  of  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, he  was  raised  to  the  highest  dignity  in  the  kingdom, 
but  afterwards  was  neglected  by  the  successors  of  that  monarch,  and 
was  only  superintendent  of  the  learned  men  who  were  connected  with 
the  court.  After  the  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Cyrus  for  Darius  the 
Mede,  he  was  again  advanced  to  be  one  of  the  three  prime  ministers 
of  the  kingdom,  but  through  the  n)achinations  of  the  courtiers  he  was 
thrown  into  the  den  of  lions,  whence  however  he  was  taken  out  un- 
hurt, and  lived  at  least  until  the  third  year  of  Cyrus,  that  is,  534  B.C., 
Dan.  x.  1.  He  must  tlien  have  arrived  at  the  age  of  eighty-five  or 
ninety  years,  so  that  his  life  could  not  have  been  protracted  mnch  be- 
yond this  period. 


406    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  148.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

[The  first  six  chapters  are  historical,  and  speak  of  Daniel  in  the 
third  person  ;  the  last  six  contain  visions,  which  Daniel  relates  in  the 
first  person. 

The  first  chapter  is  a  compendious  history  of  the  carrying  away  of 
Daniel  and  his  three  friends,  with  other  young  sons  of  the  principal 
Hebrews,  and  of  their  education  and  employment.  Between  the 
first  and  second  there  is  a  great  chasm  in  the  history.  In  ii.  1.  the 
second  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  reign  is  indeed  mentioned,  but  this 
cannot  be  the  second  year  of  his  government,  605  B.  C,  for  at  that 
time  Daniel  was  a  youth  in  the  second  year  of  his  course  of  instruc- 
tion, whereas  in  this  chapter  he  appears  as  a  man.  We  learn,  more- 
over, from  ii.  29.  that  Nebuchadnezzar  had  been  thinking  of  what 
should  transpire  after  his  death,  which  supposes  him  to  have  been  of 
considerable  age.  Chap.  ii.  28,  also  informs  us  that  his  conquests  were 
ended  ;  and  as  Ezekiel  in  xxix.  17.  announces  the  conquest  of  Egypt 
in  the  twenty-seventh  year  of  his  exile  and  the  thirty-fourth  of  Nebu- 
chadnezzar's government,  the  campaign  opening  about  that  time,  the 
account  in  Dan.  ii.  can  hardly  be  placed  before  his  fortieth  year. 
The  '  second  year'  therefore  in  ii.  1 .  must  refer  to  Nebuchadnezzar's 
government  over  the  conquered  countries  ;  in  other  words,  it  was 
the  second  year  of  his  universal  monarchy,  which  perhaps  gave  rise 
to  a  new  method  of  reckoning  time. 

In  his  last  years  Nebuchadnezzar  has  a  dream,  which  he  either 
forgets  or  refuses  to  tell  the  learned  in  order  to  try  their  skill  in  in- 
terpretation requiring  them  not  merely  to  explain  but  also  to  declare 
the  dream  itself  under  pain  of  death,  ii.  1 — 13  Daniel  at  length  re- 
ceives a  divine  revelation  of  the  di'eam  together  with  the  meaning  of 

it. Nebuchadnezzar  had  seen  standing  at  the  foot  of  a  mountain, 

a  colossal  image,  the  head  of  which  was  of  gold,  the  breast  and  arms 
of  silver,  the  belly  of  brass,  the  legs  and  thighs  of  iron,  and  the  feet 
and  toes  partly  iron  and  partly  clay.  He  had  moreover  seen  a  stone 
roll  down  from  the  mountain  withuut  the  intervention  of  human 
hands,  and  strike  the  feet  of  the  image,  which  being  overturned  and 
crushed  to  dust,  was  dispersed  by  the  winds,  while  the  stone  became 
a  great  mountain,  14 — 35.    This  is  interpreted  as  emblematic  of  four 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  407 

monarchies,  only  that  by  the  toes  of  the  feet  a  kingdom  is  pointed  out 
with  many  contemporaneous  kings,  some  strong  and  some  weak,  who 
should  form  connexions  with  each  other  by  marriage,  yet  without  se- 
curing unity.  The  stone  represents  a  kingdom  to  which  the  divine 
attention  shall  be  principally  directed,  and  which  shall  destroy  those 
kingdoms,  but  shall  itself  remain  forever,  36 — 45. 

In  the  3d  chapter  Nebuchadnezzar  convenes  all  his  officers  to 
celebrate  the  dedication  of  an  immense  golden  idol,  made  from  the 
spoils  of  his  conquests,  and  which  they  are  commanded  to  worship. 
Daniel's  three  friends  refusing  to  obey,  are  thrown  into  a  burnmg 
furnace,  where  they  remain  unhurt ;  upon  which  the  king  issues 
orders  forbidding  any  disrespect  to  be  shown  to  the  Deity  whom 
they  worship. 

In  c.  iii.  31 — iv.  34.  (iv.)  Nebuchadnezzar  makes  known  his  re- 
covery from  insanity.  With  this  view  he  gives  an  account  of  his 
malady,  which  he  introduces  by  relating  a  remarkable  dream.  He 
had  seen  a  large  tree  which  was  directed  to  be  cut  down  leaving 
nothing  but  the  trunk  or  a  sprout  from  its  roots,  which  was  to  be 
chained  and  exposed  among  the  wild  beasts  to  the  dew  of  heaven. 
Daniel  had  interpreted  the  tree  as  an  emblem  of  Nebuchadnezzar 
himself,  who  in  his  phrensy  would  imagine  himself  a  wild  beast  and 

act  as  such,  but  should  afterwards  recover  the  use  of  his  reason. 

All  this  had  taken  place,  and  the  king  gives  thanks  for  his  recovery 
to  the  God  of  Daniel. 

In  the  5th  chapter  Belshazzar  makes  a  feast  and  amidst  the  praises 
of  the  false  deities,  the  holy  vessels  of  the  temple  of  Jerusalem  are 
profaned.  Immediately  the  king  sees  the  fingers  of  a  hand  writing 
on  the  plaster  of  the  opposite  wall.  Daniel,  the  only  person  who 
can  read  the  writing  explains  it  as  referring  to  the  conquest  of  Ba- 
bylon by  the  Medes  and  Persians,  which  happened  that  same  night. 

The  sixth  chapter  is  intimately  connected  with  the  preceding. 
Darius  the  Mede,  or  Cyaxares  II.  constitutes  Daniel  one  of  his  three 
prime  ministers,  and  has  it  in  contemplation  to  set  him  over  the 
whole  kingdom.  This  excites  the  jealousy  of  the  other  officers  of 
the  crown,  who  attempt  to  ruin  Daniel  by  obtaining  a  decree  that 
for  thirty  days  no  petition  shall  be  asked  of  any  God  or  man  except 
of  the  king  himself.     As  Daniel,  notwithstanding  this,  continues  to 


408         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

pray  to  Jehovah  three  times  a  day  he  is  thrown  into  the  den  of  lioria, 
where  he  remains  without  receiving  any  injury,  while  his  accusers, 
being  upon  his  release  committed  to  the  den,  are  immediately  torn  in 
pieces.  Upon  this  Darius  commands  his  subjects  by  a  proclamation, 
to  honour  the  God  of  Daniel. 

In  the  seventh  chapter,  with  which  the  second  part  of  the  book 
commences,  Daniel  relates  a  vision  which  he  had  seen  in  the  first 
year  of  Belshazzar  seventeen  years  before  the  destruction  of  Baby- 
lon.—— The  winds  from  the  four  quarters  of  the  earth  rage  upon  the 
sea,  out  of  which  arise  foui  prodigious  monsters.  The  first,  in  the 
form  of  a  lion  with  eagles'  wings,  raises  itself  on  its  hind  feet,  and  re- 
ceives the  understanding  of  a  man.     This  is  the  Chaldean  kingdom, 

very  soon  about  to  assume  a  milder  character. The  second,  like  a 

bear,  stands  on  one  side,  having  three  ribs  in  his  mouth.  This  is  the 
Medo-Persian  empire,  which  had  swallowed  three  kingdoms,  the  Ly- 

dian.  the  Chaldean  and  the  Egyptian. The  third  monster  is  like  a 

leopard,  with  four  wings  on  its  back,  and  having  four  heads.  This  is 
the  kingdom  of  Alexander,  who  with  great  rapidity  overturned  the 
whole  Persian  empire,  and  whose  monarchy  was  at  last  divided  into 
four. 

The  fourth  monster  had  no  resemblance  to  the  others,  but  was  ex- 
ceedingly strong  and  terrible  to  look  at.  It  had  great  iron  teeth,  and 
what  escaped  being  crushed  by  them,  it  trampled  under  foot.  It  had 
ten  horns,  among  which  there  grew  up  a  small  horn  which  tore  out 
three  of  the  others,  then  became  great  was  full  of  eyes  and  had  a  hu- 
man mouth  with  which  it  blasphemed  God.  With  the  intention  of  chang- 
ing the  law  or  religion,  it  made  war  upon  and  conquered  the  saints, 
who  were  in  subjection  for  a  time,  times,  and  a  half  of  a  time.  Here- 
upon the  Eternal  sits  in  judgment  commands  the  monster  to  be  put 
to  death,  and  the  others  to  be  deprived  of  their  dominion,  but  allows 
them  to  live  until  a  definite  time.  Then  came  in  the  clouds  a  human 
form  and  received  the  dominion,  the  saints  received  right,  that  is  to 
say,  they  conquered  and  fortified  the  kingdom.  All  this  is  emblema- 
tic of  the  times  of  the  Greek  kingdoms  which  »vere  to  spring  fi'om  the 
monarchy  of  Alexander.  Although  indeed  the  more  considerable  of 
these  kingdoms  were  only  four,  yet  if  the  less  important  are  added 
to  them,  they  will  approach  so  near  to  ten,  that  this  round  number 


op    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  409 

may  very  properly  be  used.  The  little  horn  which  became  great  is- 
Antiochus  Epiphanes.  who  prohibited  the  worship  of  the  true  God, 
and  persecuted  and  made  war  upon  the  pious  Jews.  The  human 
figure  in  the  clouds  is  an  emblem  of  the  Maccabees.* 

In  the  third  year  of  Belshazzar,  fourteen  years  before  the  conquest 
of  Babylon,  Daniel  has  another  vision,  which  he  relates  in  the  eighth 
chapter.  He  sees  before  the  river  Ulai  or  Eulaeus,  a  ram  with  two 
great  horns,  one  of  which  is  larger  than  the  other  (these  represented 
the  Medes  and  Persians);  with  these  horns  he  strikes  with  such  force 
to  the  West,  North  and  South,  that  no  beast  can  stand  before  him. 
(an  emblem  of  the  Medo-Persian  victories.)  Then  he  sees  a  he- 
goat,  (the  Greek  power,)  with  a  sharp  horn  between  his  eyes,  (Alex- 
ander.) coming  so  swiftly  from  the  West,  that  he  scarcely  touches 
the  ground,  running  with  rage  against  the  ram,  breaking  off  his  horns, 
throwing  him  on  the  ground  and  trampling  him  under  foot.  After 
this  the  victorious  he-goat  grows  to  an  astonishing  greatness,  (that  of 
Alexander's  monarchy,)  but  soon  the  horn  is  broken,  (Alexander 
dies,)  and  four  sharp  horns  spring  up,  (the  four  larger  Greek  king- 
doms, Egypt,  Syria,  Macedonia  and  Thrace,)  from  one  of  which 
grows  out  a  small  horn,  which  performs  exploits  towards  the  South. 
East,  and  the  pleasant  land  that  is,  Palestine  ;  it  acts  against  the 
host  of  heaven,  throws  down  some  stars  and  tramples  on  them.  It  con- 
tends even  with  the  prince  himself  of  the  heavenly  host,  the  conti- 
nual offerings  are  taken  away,  and  through  treachery  a  garrison 
is  stationed  at  the  place.  This  continues  for  2300  morning  and 
evening  offerings,  1 160  days,  that  is  about  three  years  and  a  half,  and 
then  the  rights  of  the  sanctuary  are  restored. This  is  a  repre- 
sentation of  the  expeditions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  against  Egypt, 
against  Armenia  and  Persia,  and  against  Judea,  and  of  his  persecu- 
tions, when  the  Jews  at  the  end  obtained  their  independence. 

Chap.  ix.  In  the  first  year  of  Darius  the  Mede,  Daniel  computed 
the  seventy  years  of  service  which  are  announced  in  the  writings  of 
Jeremiah  (xxv.  11,  12.  xxix.  10.),  and  offered  a  prayer  for  the  ter- 
mination of  the  Qaptivity.    Immediately  he  received  an  answer  through 

*  [The  reader  will  recollect  that  the  translators  are  not  responsible  for  the  views 
and  interpretations  of  their  author.  On  these  and  other  expositions  he  will  of  conrsr 
f'^roa  his  own  opinion.     2V.] 


110         PAKTICULAIi    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

the  angel  Gabriel,  which,  however,  is  in  some  respects  not  easily  ex- 
plained, and  has  therefore  excited  considerable  difference  among 
interpreters.  It  is  probable  that  some  errors  exist  in  numbers,  and 
that  some  false  readings  have  crept  in,  for  the  Alexandrine  transla- 
tion has  expressed  considerable  discrepancies  in  the  numbers  in  v. 
25 — 27,  and  Theodotion  in  v.  26  expresses  \'-\  instead  of  pN.*     It  is 

certain  that  in  v.  24,  the  speedy  termination  of  the  seventy  years  is 
announced,   and  that  we  ought  not  to   read  oyj^  D'y^ty,   seventy 

weeks,  but  Qy2lff  D"j?3*^,  seventy  seventy  (namely  years)  are  deter- 
mined or  coming  to  an  end  over  thy  people,  to  finish  transgression, 
(its  punishment,)  to  seal  up  sirs,  (discipline  on  account  of  them,)  to 
make  reconciliation  for  iniquity,  to  re-establish  ancient  righteousness, 
to  mark  the  vision  of  the  prophet  with  the  seal  of  truth.  What  fol- 
lows is  a  disclosure  of  a  remote  futurity  after  the  return  from  captivity., 
which  the  greater  part  of  interpreters  explain  of  the  Messiah  ;  and 
some,  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  which  Christ  always  ascribed 
to  himself,  and  accomplished  by  Titus.  This  last  is,  in  my  opinion, 
the  more  probable  exposition. 

Chap.  X — xii.  In  this  portion,  Daniel  relates  that  very  particular 
vision  which  he  had  in  the  third  year  of  Cyrus.  The  introduction. 
X.  1 — xi.  1,  gives  a  representation  of  the  vision  with  a  reference  to 
Media,  Persia,  and  Greece.  By  the  personage  who  appears  to  Da- 
niel a  long  series  of  circumstances  is  announced,  as  follows  : 

Chap.  xi.  2.  The  irruption  of  Xerxes  into  Greece  is  the  original 
cause  of  the  subsequent  destruction  of  the  Persian  monarchy. 

V.  3.  Alexander's  conquest  of  the  Persian  kingdom  and  his  end. 

V.  4.  The  division  of  his  kingdom. 

V.  5.  The  power  of  Ptolemy  Lagus  in  Egypt,  and  the  superior 
power  of  the  Egyptian  nobleman  Seleucus  Nicator,  in  Syria,  Asia 
Minor,  and  the  East. 

V.  6.  The  connexion  between  Ptolemy  Philadelphus  and  Antio- 
chus  Theus,  249  B.  C,  with  the  lamentable  consequences  that 
followed. 

['*'  See  Daniel  secundum  Septuaginta  ex  Tetiaplis  Origenis,  Romae,  fol.  1775,  ^4Z. 
p.  276,  277.     Tr.J 


OP  thf:  old  testament.  -1 1  I 

V.  7,  8.  The  war  of  Ptolemy  Euergetes  against  Syria.  24(!, 
<245  B.  C. 

V.  9.  The  ineffectual  expedition  of  Seleucus  Callinicus  against 
Egypt,  244  B.  C. 

V.  10,  11.  The  expedition  of  Antiochus  the  Great  against  Egypt. 
219  B.  C. 

V.  12.  The  victory  of  Ptolemy  Philopator  over  Antiochus  the 
Great,  217  B.  C. 

V.  13 — 17.  The  expedition  of  Antiochus  the  Great  against  Pto- 
lemy Epiphanes,  202  B.  C,  and  the  connexion  of  his  daughter  with 
Ptolemy  Epiphanes. 

V.  18,  19.  The  expedition  of  Antiochus  the  Great  against  Thrace, 
197  B.  C. 

V.  20.  Seleucus  Philopator,  who  attempted  to  remove  the  trea- 
sure in  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  186  B.  C.    *" 

V.  21 — 45,  The  actions  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  his  expeditions 
against  Egypt,  the  persecution  of  the  Jews,  the  desecration  of  the 
temple,  &-c.[a] 

The  conclusion  of  tlxis  vision,  c.  xii.,  determines  the  continuance 
of  the  oppressions  under  Antiochus  Epiphanes  for  a  tune,  times, 
and  a  half  time.  A  further  disclosure  is  refused  to  Daniel,  to  whom 
these  revelations  were  imintelligible,  v.  8,  9,  only  the  period  is  an- 
nounced in  days,  and  the  number  placed  at  1290,  about  three  years 
and  a  half.] 

[a)  Comp.  Prideaux,  P.  II.  B.  II.  An.  249,246, 187, 176, 164.    TV.] 

/ 
§  149.     Of  the  Style  of  Daniel. 

The  dreams  and  Visions  by  which  divine  revelations  are  presented 
in  this  book,  exhibit  great  symbols  which  are  easily  distinguished. 
Thbse  which  are  most  obscure  are  explained,  not  as  is  the  case  in 
Ezekiel,  by  God  himself,  but  by  angels  who  like  the  Zoroastrian  spi- 
rits, are,  as  it  were,  princes,  the  spirits  who  are  watchers  or  guardi- 
ans over  kingdoms,  x.  13,  20,  21. -The  style  is  prosaic,  the  lan- 
guage intermixed  with  many  Chaldee  and  other  foreign  words,  and 
part  of  the  book  (ii.  4 — vii.  28.)  is  written  in  Chaldee.  Some  wri- 
ters assert  that  it  contains  Greek  words  :  but  clear  examples  cannot 


412         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

be  adduced,  for  those  brought  forward  are  oriental  words,  and  partly 
Persian  or  Median,  and  may  be  satisfactorily  explained  from  the 
Zend,  the  Pehlvi,  and  the  Parsi.     For  instance  D'Dmi)  in  i.  3,  is  not 

the  Greek  "rr^oTi/xoi  but  the  Parsi,  Phardomim  or  Pakdomim,  magnates, 
nobles,  Zend-Avesta,  II.  Th.  S.  82.  The  names  of  musical  instru- 
ments in  iii.  6,  7,  10,  16,  are  originally  eastern,  transformed  by  the 
Greeks  according  to  their  usage,  [a]    The  words  T13  to  proclaim,  and 

Xih3  a  herald,  in  iii.  4.  v.  29.,  still  remain  in  the  Zendian  khresio, 

something  that  cries,  shrieks  out  from  behind,  Zend-Avesta,  III.  Th. 
S.  146.,  and  consequently  they  are  not  derived  from  the  Greek 
xyj^utfrfw  and  xy)^u|,  but  have  rather  given  birth  to  these  words.  And 
the  terms  NDjns,  DJns  in  iii.  16.  iv.  14,  are  the  Pehlvi  pedam  and 

the  Persian  peigham,  ^end-Avesta,  III.  Th.  S.  171,  174,  190,  191, 
and  certainly  not  the  Greek  (p&sy^a,  which  was  not  so  common  a 
word  as  to  have  been  introduced  into  the  oriental  languages. 

A  Hebrew  version  of  those  parts  of  the  books  of  Daniel  and  Ezra 
which  are  written  in  Chaldee,  was  found  by  Kennicott,  in  a  manu- 
script written  A.  D.  1327,  and  has  been  printed  by  him  in  his  edition  of 
the  Bible.  It  was  republished  by  John  Louis  Schulze.  in  1782,  at 
Halle,  with  the  title,  L'haldaicorum  Danielis  et  EzrcE  capiium  interpre- 
tatio  Htbraica.    Comp.  Michaehs  Orient.  Biblioth.  T.  XXI.  S.  130. 

[a)  This  may  be  true  of  Dl'^rcp,  xiflapij  ;    and   03D,  tfafX^ux*)  ; 

but  it  seems  hardly  probable  in  the  case  of  1£DJD3   -v^aXTiip,  a  word 

susceptible  of  a  regular  derivation  from  -^aXXw,  and  still  less  so  in 
rrJaOID,   tfuficpwvia,   a  word  evidently  compounded  from  the  Greek 

words  tfuv  and  (pwvsw.— De  Wette  allows  the  probability  that  T1D, 

XTi^3,  DJna,  and  n3Ta3,  are  of  Persian  origin,  §  255.  anm.  c). 

EiCHHORiv  adds,  as  words  of  Grecian  origin,  2;'l3i3,  (or  urDS)  'Jtsroufog, 

iii.  21.,  and  WJDH,  |*aviax»)<:.  v.  7.,  Einlejt.  B.  IV.  S.  479,491.   2V-1 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  41. J 

§  150.     Whether  Daniel  was  the  author  of  the  Book. 

Porphyry  placed  this  book  in  the  age  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  and 
supposed  some  unknown  author  (in  wliich  a  considerable  number  of 
writers  in  the  present  day  agree  with  him,)  to  have  announced  events 
which  had  already  taken  place  in  the  manner  of  the  prophets,  and  to 
have  introduced  Daniel  as  predicting  them.  But  the  book  is  com- 
posed in  such  a  manner  as  it  would  have  been  if  written  by  a  pious 
and  tvise  man,  such  as  Daniel  is  represented  by  Ezekiel  to  have  been  ; 
one  who  was  well  acquainted  with  the  Chaldee  and  Hebrew  lan- 
guages, and  who,  from  his  education  in  Babylon  and  his  residence 
among  Babylonians,  Chaldeans  Magians  and  other  foreigners,  who 
came  from  all  quarters  in  large  numbei-s  to  the  metropolis,  was  ac- 
customed to  the  use  of  foreign  words,  and  had  acquired  also  many^o- 
reign  ideas  and  opinions.  The  chai-acter  of  the  book  is  such  as  it 
would  have  been  if  written  by  a  man  who  lived  at  Babylon  in  the  time 
of  the  Chaldean  monarchy  and  was  perfectly  acquainted  with  the 
names  of  the  various  offices  belonging  to  the  kingdom  and  the  court ; 
who  himself,  well  versed  in  political  transactions,  reflected  much  on 
future  changes,  examined  the  writings  of  Jeremiah  with  a  view  to 
them,  and  prayed  to  God  f  u  more  extensive  information  ;  who  saw 
the  future  according  to  certain  opinions  of  tae  Magians  to  which  he 
was  accustomed  ;  who,  being  a  man  of  political  knowledge,  perceived 
these  divine  revelations  with  greater  accuracy,  and  committed  them  to 
writing  with  more  perspicuity,  than  a  person  of  a  difFerent  character 
would  have  done  ;  who,  like  his  conteaipoiary  Ezekiel  noted  the  year 
and  day  when  a  vision  appeared  to  him  ;  whose  Chaldaic  composition, 
as  is  the  case  also  in  the  book  of  Ezra,  contains  many  Hebraisms,  as 
bopn  and  bapTMi  for  hopa,  S^Dpnn  for  "7000,  which  are  very  seldom 

met  with  in  the  Targums  ;  und  lastly,  whose  Hebrew  is  inferior  but 
yet  as  pure  as  could  be  expected  from  a  man  who  had  grown  up  and 
spent  his  life  among  the  Chaldeans. 

It  is  undeniable,  that  the  whole  book  is  the  production  of  one  au- 
thor, for  the  same  manner  and  style  are  constantly  observable,  and 
the  latter  parts  contain  references  to  the  former. [a]  Now  if  some 
other  person  than  Daniel  was  the  author,  who  composed  the  book 
m  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  after  the  year  163  B.  C.  he 


414    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

must  have  written  in  Palestine.     In  that  case  he  would  not  have  been 
acquainted  with  the  names   of  Chaldean  offices,  which  are  in  the 
Zendic,  Pehhnc  and  Parsic  languages  ;  and  he  could  not  have  been 
acquainted  with  the  views  peculiar  to  the  Magians   much  less  would 
he  have  ventured  to  make  use  of  them ;   he  would  not  have  applied 
to  the  last  king  of  the  Chaldeans  the  name  Belshazzar,  which  is  un- 
known to  historians  ;  he  would  not  have  c(/eered  the  walls  of  the  royal 
supper-hall  with  /daster    but  rather  with   costly  wainscot ;  he  would 
not  have  known  that  Xerxes  had   excited  even  the  West,  (the  Car- 
thaginians.) neither  would  he  have  been  acquainted  with  the  history 
of  Alexander,  of  Egypt  and  of  Syria,  Dan.  xi.  2.  vii.  6.  viii.  5.  xi.  3 ; 
he  would  not  liave  mentioned  the  third  expedition  of  Antiochus  Epi- 
phanes  a  second  time  (xi.  40.),  out  of  its  natural  order  ;   neither 
would  he  have  written  oc<:;asionally  so  enigmatically,  nor  have  used 
two  dialects:   but  he  would  carefully  have  avoided  whatever  would 
have  thrown  difficulties  in  the  way  of  his  reader  ;   he  would  not  have 
specified  the  year  and  day  of  his  visions,  which  could  affi^rd  him  no 
advantage  in  the  transformation  of  history  into  prophecy  ;   he  would 
have  inserted  in  his  visions  less  of  Alexander  and  more  respecting  the 
Maccabees;  and  he  would  not  have  said  in  viii.  15,  27.  xii.  4-  8.  that 
these  predictions  were  unintelligible  until  they  should  be  accomplish- 
ed  and  that  the  prophecy  x.  1.  was  understood  by  Daniel   such  ob- 
servations being  inconsistent  with  the  supposed  transformation. 

If,  however,  all  these  considerations  should  be  disregarded,  it  will 
still  be  impossible  to  conceive  how  a  work,  written  in  the  time  of  the 
Maccabees,  when  the  Jews  were  so  zealous  for  their  sacred  books, 
could  have  been  introduced  into  the  canon,  especially  as  there  were 
then  large  numbers  of  Jews  whose  minds  were  cultivated  by  the  study 
of  Greek  literature,  and  who  were  therefore  the  more  acute  in  dis- 
tinguishing genuine  productions  from  spurious.  The  canon  had  been 
for  a  long  time  so  firmly  settled  at  that  period,  that  even  the  book  of 
Ecclesiaaticus,  which  is  rather  more  ancient,  could  not  gain  admis- 
sion, although  v/ritten  in  Hebrew  and  of  the  greatest  utility.  Be- 
sides, a  modern  book  could  not  be  obtruded  upon  the  Jews,  at  that 
time  dispersed  in  various  countries,  without  giving  rise  to  controver- 
sies ;  and  if  this  had  been  the  case  some  traces  at  least  would  have 
been  discoverable  in  the  books  of  the  Maccabees  or  in  later  writings. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  415 

J3ut  they  will  be  sought  for  in  vain,  while  on  the  contrary  the  ancients 
unanimously  testify  that  Daniel  is  the  author  of  the  hook.  Josephus 
says,  Ant  XI.  viii.  5.,  that  the  book  of  Daniel  was  shown  to  Alexan- 
der. The  author  of  the  first  hook  of  Maccabees,  c.  ii.  59,  refers  to 
the  histoi-y  of  Hananiah,  Azaria  and  Mishael  and  in  i.  54,  takes  a 
phrase  from  Dan.  xi.  31,  and  even  from  the  Alexandrine  version  ; 
which  proves  that  at  that  period  the  book  must  have  been  some  time 
translated  into  Greek.  That  the  version  is  much  more  ancient  than 
that  period  is  further  evident  from  the  circumstance,  that  the  Creek 
translator,  sufficiently  bold  in  other  respects,  has  not  only  sought  no 
information  from  history  in  obscure  places,  but  has  even  misunder- 
stood some  which  history  illustrates.  The  book  of  Daniel  is  also 
much  older  than  the  time  in  which  the  Greek  version  of  the  Penta- 
teuch was  made  ;  for  the  translator  who  is  generally  accurate  would 
not  have  translated  in  Deut.  xxxii.  8,  that  God  had  divided  the  nations 
■Kara.  a^iSjxov  a^ysXwv  &ss,  unless  he  had  been  preceded  by  DanieL 
who  mentions  spirits,  as  guardians  of  nations  and  kingdoms.  See  x> 
13,  20,  21.  xii.  1. 

[a)  This  is  abundantly  proved  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  256.  who 
gives  very  numerous  references  which  show  the  complete  and  necessary 
connexion  of  all  the  parts  of  the  book  with  each  other.     TV.] 

§  151.     Objections  to  the  genuineness  of  the  Booh  of  Daniel. 

It  is  objected  to  the  whole  book  of  Daniel,  that  the  Jews  have  in- 
serted it  among  the  Hagiographa  ;  and  hence  it  has  been  inferred, 
that  the  work  first  sprang  into  notice  in  a  recent  age,  since  it  would 
have  merited  a  place  among  the  prophets,  if  it  had  been  kaown  in 
more  ancient  periods.  To  this  it  is  added  that  as  the  son  of  Sirach  does 
not  reckon  Daniel  among  the  prophets,  whom  he  celebrates  in  c.  xlix. 

the  book  could  not  have  existed  in  his  time. But  the  placing  of 

Daniel  among  the  Hagiographa  is  the  work  of  a  more  modern  age, 
when  the  Jews,  in  imitation  of  the  conduct  of  the  Greeks  towards 
their  philosophers,  refused  the  honours  of  a  prophet  to  those  who  had 
been  conversant  with  courts,  where  Daniel  constantly  resided  ;  and 
for  this  trifling  reason,  which  however  was  then  considered  as  very 
important,  and  is  therefore  made  a  ground  of  reproach  by  Porphyry. 


416  PARTICULAR  IN'PIJ.ODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

as  Jerome  testifies  in  his  comment  on  Dan  iii.,  they  have  reiected 
Daniel  from  the  order  of  prophets  and  place  him  among  the  writers 
of  the  Hagiographa.     But  the  more  ancient  Jews  reckoned  Daniel 

among  the  prophets.     Comp.  above,  Part  I.  §  28. With  respect 

to  the  son  of  Sirach,  in  xlix.  6 — 10  he  confines  himself  to  lauding 
those  prophets  who  had  predicted  the  Babylonian  captivity,  and  there- 
fore he  passes  by  Isaiah  not  mentioning  him  except  in  connexion 
with  Hezekiah,  whom  he  introduces  in  xlviii.  20,  22.  The  sealing 
and  shutting  up,  mentioned  in  Dan.  viii.  26.  and  xii.  4.  which  some 
have  considered  as  a  direction  to  keep  the  book  concealed  until  a  de- 
finite time,  is  not,  as  they  have  supposed,  an  excuse  for  its  late  ap- 
pearance. It  is  evident  from  viii.  26,  27.  xii.  9,  10,  that  the  prophet 
is  ordered  to  declare  that  these  predictions  cannot  be  understood  un- 
til the  period  of  their  completion,  and  thus  they  are  shut  up  as  it 
were  with  a  seal  and  hidden  from  the  understanding  ;  for  the  pro- 
phets merely  announce  the  future  existence  of  what  they  are  ordered 

to  do.     Comp.  Isa.  vi.  10.  Jer.  i.  10. Neither  is  there  any  weight 

in  the  remark  of  some  writers,  that  a  book  so  very  agreeable  to  the 
Maccabees  could  readily  have  been  introduced  into  the  canon,  because 
after  the  burning  of  the  sacred  books  by  the  command  of  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  it  would  be  impossible  to  know  what  they  were  ;  for  it 
was  only  the  Pentateuch  which  was  sought  for  ;  and  neither  of  this 
nor-of  the  other  books  could  all  the  copies  be  destroyed,  because  they 
were  very  numerous  in  western  countries  not  subject  to  Antiochus, 
as  in  Egypt,  Cyrene,  and  Asia  Minor.  No  doubt  also  many  copies 
even  in  Palestine  were  rescued  from  the  flames,  for  such  treasures 
are  always  preserved  with  the  greater  care  in  proportion  to  the  anxi- 
ety to  destroy  them.  The  Maccabees,  who  were  exceedingly  tena- 
cious of  the  traditions  of  their  ancestors,  were  intimately  acquainted 
with  the  sacred  books,  which  they  had  read  while  children,  and  now 
valued  in  the  highest  degree  ;  and  they  were  not  so  simple  as  to  as- 
cribe to  Daniel  and  reckon  among  those  books,  a  work  which  in  their 
own  day  first  sprang  from  obscurity. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMEjNT.  417 

§  1 52.     Arguments  against  the  first  part  of  Daniel. 

The  arguments  which  are  alleged  against  the  first  six  chapters  of 
Daniel,  rest  in  a  great  measure  on  the  many  extraordinary  and  won- 
derful things  therein  related.  But  since  the  author's  purpose,  except 
in  the  first  chapter,  is  to  r^late  those  things  only  which  God  did  in 
an  extraordinary  way,  that  the  Hebrew  exiles  might  persevere  in  the 
religion  of  their  ancestors,  and  the  heathen  be  warned  of  the  exist- 
ence of  the  true  God,  all  other  matters  which  were  merely  in  accord 
ance  with  the  natural  course  of  things,  are  not  to  be  expected. 

They  who  urge  or  assume  the  impossibility  of  miracles,  should 
know,  that  a  philosophical  question  can  have  no  bearing  on  a  point  of 
criticism. 

The  Chaldee  dialect  in  ii.  4 — vii.  28.  extends  to  the  second  part 
of  the  book,  and  it  does  not  present  any  difficulty  ;  for  whatever  may 
be  the  cause  of  two  dialects  being  employed  in  so  small  a  book,  the 
use  of  them  may  rather  be  expected  from  Daniel  than  from  any  other, 
for  a  more  modern  author  would  have  avoided  this  diversity,  which 
might  offend  his  readers,  as  the  prophets  exhibit  no  similar  example. 
It  has  been  already  remarked,  that  certain  words  which  are  said  to 
be  of  Greek  extraction,  are  oriental,  and  therefore  they  cannot  be 
employed  as  an  argument  for  a  more  modern  age.  On  the  contrary. 
Zendic,  Pehlvic,  and  Parsic  terms,  belong  to  a  more  ancient  period 
than  that  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  ;  for  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 
little  or  no  intercourse  subsisted  between  the  Babylonians  and  Medes 
and  the  Elamites  or  Persians,  before  the  time  of  Cyrus  For  although 
it  admits  of  some  doubt,  whether  Zoroaster  taught  at  Babylon,  yet 
that  there  were  many  Magians  in  that  city,  and  that  their  system  pre- 
vailed before  hjis  time,  is  plain  from  this  fact,  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  accompanied  in  his  expeditions  by  the  superintendent  of  the  Ma- 
gian  priests,  called  Jo  3i.  Jer.  xxxix.  3.    Comp.  Germ.  Archaiol.  II. 

P.  II.  Th.  §  179.  S.  282—285.  The  horses  and  chariots  of  the  Sun. 
which  the  predecessors  of  Josiah  had  placed  at  Jerusalem,  II  Kings 
xxiii.  1 1 .  prove  beyond  a  doubt  that  these  superstitions  were  not  only 
much  more  ancient  than  Zoroaster,  but  had  been  widely  spread.  Nor 
iTUist  it  be  omitted,  that  Belesis,  governor  of  Babylonia,  in  conjunc- 
tion with  Arbaccs  king  of  the  Medes,  had  long  before  overturned  thf 

53 


418     FAUTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

more  ancient  kingdom  of  the  Assyrians,  as  afterwards  Nabopolassar- 
a  Chaldean,  associated  with  the  king  of  the  Medes-,  conquered  the 
second  Assyrian  empire.  This  same  intercourse  of  Babylonians  with 
Medes  and  Persians,  is  shown  also  by  the  wedge-hke  character  of 
writing,  which  is  observable  both  in  the  ruins  of  Persepolis  and  on  the 
Babylonian  bricks.  Comp.  Asiatiches  Magazin,  1802,  6tes  Stiick. 
These  arguments  are  abundantly  sufficient  to  prove,  that  the  Babylo- 
nians and  other  oriental  nations,  Medes  and  Persians  for  instance,  lived 
in  habits  of  mutual  intercourse.  It  is  not  at  all  surprising,  therefore, 
that  some  things  should  occur  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  which  was  written 
in  Babylon,  that  belonged  originally  to  the  dialects  of  those  nations. 

Nebuchadnezzar  does  indeed  adore  or  prostrate  himself  before 
Daniel,  ii.  46.  But  after  Daniel  had  announced  the  dream  which  the 
king  had  not  made  known  and  the  interpretation  of  it,  such  humilia- 
tion is  not,  according  to  the  superstition  of  that  age,  so  excessive  as 
to  be  a  proper  object  of  suspicion.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose, 
that  the  golden  statue  sixty  cubits  high  and  six  wide,  c.  iii.  was  made 
of  solid  gold,  which  in  the  valley  of  Dura  could  hardly  be  preserved 
from  robbers.  It  was  overlaid  with  gold.  The  proportion  of  the 
height  to  the  breadth,  varying  from  that  of  the  human  form,  was  either 
believed  to  be  more  dignified,  or  it  was  retained  from  a  rude  antiquity. 
It  is  idle  to  ask  why  Daniel's  three  friends  only  were  subjected  to  such 
extreme  danger  ;  Daniel  himself  was  perhaps  sick  at  the  time,  or  he 
may  have  been  absent  from  Babylon,  and  therefore  not  required  to 
join  in  the  adoration  of  the  statue.  The  silence  of  the  history  with 
respect  to  Daniel  rather  proves  that  the  book  was  written  at  a  time 
when  it  was  known  to  every  reader  in  what  way  he  avoided  the  dan- 
ger. Those  persons,  who  ask  how  the  other  Jews  withdrew,  forget 
that  the  command  to  be  present  at  the  dedication  of  the  image  was 
limited  to  the  i-ulers  of  the  state,  iii.  2,  3. 

In  the  account  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  insanity,  c.  iv,  the  difficulty 
lies  in  the  seven  years  during  which  it  is  said  to  have  lasted.  But  if 
pjr  in  V.  13,  which  properly  signifies  any  time,  even  a  moment,  be 

understood  of  months,  or  of  parts  of  a  year,  six  of  which  are  num- 
bered by  the  orientals,  making  Nebuchadnezzar's  insanity  to  have 
continued  through  seven  of  these  parts  or  fourteen  months,  the  diffi- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEN 1 .  119 

culties  will  vanish.     If  pj^;;  and  D*ni?iD  in  vii.  25.  xii.  7.  mean  years' 

in  the  prophetic  sense,  the  same  cannot  be  the  meaning  of  iv.  13. 
because  it  appears  from  the  narrative  that  this  insanity  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar happened  after  all  his  mihtary  expeditions,  and  after  he  had 
enlarged  and  adorned  Babylon,  and  therefore  in  the  fortieth  or  forty- 
first  year  of  his  reign,  after  which  time  he  lived  only  two  or  three 
years,  so  that  his  insanity  could  hardly  have  been  extended  beyond 
fourteen  months.  It  is  needless  then  to  inquire  how  the  kingdom 
was  preserved  for  an  insane  man  ;  for  his  courtiers,  ignorant  of  what 
would  be  their  condition  under  a  successor,  used  all  their  exertions  to 

preserve  the  kingdom  for  him. There  is  no  reason  for  supposing 

that  the  insane  monarch  would  have  perished  by  living  on  herbs,  or 
that  he  would  have  been  devoured  by  beasts ;  for  Nebuchadnezzar, 
labouring  under  the  fixed  idea  that  he  had  been  transformed  into  a 
beast  and  driven  from  his  kingdom,  might  have  prepared  for  flight ; 
and  upon  being  guarded  and  confined,  at  length  perhaps  escaped, 
sought  intercourse  with  beasts,  few  or  none  of  which  were  to  be 
found  in  the  vicinity  of  the  royal  city,  and  ate  herbs  which  may  have 
had  a  salutary  influence  on  his  disease.  At  length  being  found  by 
his  courtiers  he  recovered  his  senses. Profane  history  has  pre- 
served so  little  relating  to  Nebuchadnezzar  that  it  would  not  be  sur- 
prising if  not  a  vestige  respecting  this  insanity  could  be  found ;  yet 
some  traces  of  it  occur  in  Megasthenes  and  Berosus  in  Josephus 
cont.  Apion.  I.  20.  and  Ant.  X.  xi.  1.,  and  in  Eusebius,  Praep. 
Evang.  IX.  41.  There  can  be  no  question,  why  Nebuchadnezzar  an- 
nounced these  matters  in  public  documents,  for  it  is  very  evident  that 
he  wished  to  give  his  people  notice  that  he  had  resumed  the  reins  of 

government. It  is  worthy  of  observation  that  the  whole  of  this 

narrative  is  so  accurate  and  natural  that  it  is  hardly  possible  that  it 
should  be  a  forgery. 

Profane  history  does  not  indeed  mention  any  Chaldean  king  of  the 
name  of  Belshazzar,  but  this  is  no  proof  that  no  king  of  this  name 
ever  lived,  for  the  orientals,  and  especially  their  kings,  are  often  de- 
signated by  several  names.  On  the  other  hand,  a  modern  writer,  as 
was  before  remarked,  would  have  carefully  avoided  a  name  unknown 
to  history.    Belshazzar  is  the  last  of  the  Chaldean  kings,  who  is  called 


420         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

elsewhere  Nabonnedus,  Nabonnadt.s,  Nabannidochus,  Naboandelu?. 
Labynetus.  These  names  are  more  corrupt  and  agree  less  with 
other  properly  Chaldaic  words  than  Belshazzar.  Megasthenes  in 
EcsEBius,  ubi  sup.  does  not  deny  that  Nabannidochus  was  of  the  fa- 
mily of  Nebuchadnezzar,  but  only  says  that  he  was  not  like  his  prede- 
cessor Labassoarascus  in  cruelty.  The  context  shows  that  this  is  the 
meaning  of  '!r^o(frixovTa  oi  s^sv. Although  in  v.  17.  ss.  Daniel  ad- 
dresses Belshazzar  almost  as  a  prophet  would  have  addressed  a  Jew- 
ish king  under  the  theocracy,  it  should  be  considered  that  Daniel  was 
at  that  time  a  venerable  old  man  of  almost  eighty-five  years,  much  ce- 
lebrated for  piety,  wisdom,  and  divine  revelations-  and  that  he  was 
speaking  a  short  time  before  the  city  was  taken,  to  a  king  terrified  by 

the  writing  which  had  suddenly  appeared  on  the  wall. But  why 

stick  a  miracle  as  this  in  the  last  moments  of  the  Chaldean  monarchy  ? 
In  order  that  an  occasion  might  be  afforded  Daniel  of  again  demon- 
strating his  divine  mission,  and  that  thus  he  might  acquire  the  favour 
of  the  victorious  Medes  and  Persians,  and  particularly  of  Cyrus,  from 
whom  he  was  to  obtain  the  release  of  the  Hebrews. 

§  1 53.     ArguTnents  against  the  second  part  of  Daniel. 

To  the  prophecies  of  Daniel  which  are  contained  in  the  last  six 
chapters,  it  is  objected  that  the  events  predicted  are  remote,  and  that 
as  they  are  announced  with  so  much  accuracy  and  do  not  extend  be- 
yond the  age  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  they  appear  to  be  prophecies 
written  in  the  time  of  that  king  respecting  events  which  had  already 

taken  place. But  the  accuracy  of  these  prophecies  is  scarcely 

greater  than  of  certain  others  which  predict  remote  events,  as  Jer  I. 
li.  Ezek.  xxvii.  xxviii.  Zech.  ix.  1 — 8.  ix.  11 — x.  12  ;  and  if  Daniel's 
representations  of  future  events  are  somewhat  more  accurate,  this  is 
to  be  accounted  for  from  his  character  as  a  man  accustomed  to  poli- 
tical affairs,  who  would  therefore  take  a  mor%  particular  view  of 
what  was  disclosed  to  him.  The  Jews  of  the  age  of  Epiphanes  were 
well  acquainted  with  the  form  of  prophecies,  and  if  the  book  of  Da- 
niel had  first  made  its  appearance  in  that  age  and  widely  diflfering  from 
that  form,  they  would  have  rejected  it,  or  at  least  they  would  not 
have  unanimously  received  it  every  where  without  any  opposition  as 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  421 

a  genuine  production.  But  indeed  if  the  perspicuity  were  as  great 
as  is  pretended,  interpretations  so  exceedingly  diverse  would  never 
have  arisen.  That  the  predictions  do  not  extend  beyond  the  age  of 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  is  not  correct,  comp.  vii.  13.  ss.  ix.  25.  ss.;  and 
if  predictions  of  this  latter  kind  are  attended  w^ith  greater  obscurity 
than  the  rest  it  is  from  a  reason  already  often  mentioned,  namely,  that 
the  more  remote  events  may  be,  the  more  obscurely  they  are  pre- 
dicted.*  If  the  aigels  introduced  in  the  book  of  Daniel  are  just 

such  as  those  described  by  the  Rabbins,  these  writers,  who  draw  from 
the  Bible,  which  however  they  do  not  always  correctly  explain,  may 
be  considered  as  having  taken  their  representations  from  Daniel. 
The  same  remark  affords  a  reply  to  the  objection,  that  the  book  is  in 
this  respect  hke  the  modern  apocryphal  book  of  Ezra.  But  these  spi- 
rits in  Daniel,  borrowed  from  the  doctrine  of  the  Magians,  are  symbols 
similar  to  those  which  occur  in  writings  of  a  more  ancient  period  as 
the  angel  of  the  pestilence,  II  Sam.  xxiv.  16.  I  Chron.  xxi.  14 — 18., 
the  spirit  of  lying,  I  Kings  xxii.  19 — 22,  and  the  Seraphim,  Isa.  vi. 

1 — 10. If  the  Messiah  of  Daniel  is  similar  to  the  Messiah  of  the 

Rabbins  ;  these  have  derived  their  ideas  from  the  prophet. If  c. 

xii.  2,  3,  13.  speaks  of  the  general  resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  vir- 
tuous and  vicious,  it  is  well  known  that  this  was  a  doctrine  bold  by 
the  Magians.  The  figure  in  Ezek.  xxxvi.  is  borrowed  from  it,  and 
the  truth  of  the  doctrine  may  have  been  confirmed  to  the  Jews  in 
consequence  of  its  being  thus  announced  by  Daniel,  from  whom  it 
was  obtained  by  the  Rabbins.  If,  in  the  age  of  Antiochus  Epipha- 
nes, a  book  just  pubhshed  had  exhibited  this  as  a  new  doctrine,  it 
would  on  this  account  alone  have  been  rejected.  Lastly,  the  book  is 
not  silent,  as  has  been  said  respecting  the  return  from  captivity  ;  for 
this  subject  is  introduced  in  c.  ix,  and  in  the  twenty-fourth  verse  the 
consecration  of  a  new  temple  is  promised.  A  more  modern  writer 
would  have  said  more  on  this  subject. 

Bertholdt  contends  that  the  book  contains  things  which  are  more 
modern  than  the  age  of  Daniel.  But  any  one  who  will  examine 
them  with  impartiality,  will  find  that  tliis  is  not  the  case.  The  ex- 
pression, son  of  God,  in  iii.  25  is  used  of  angels  in  Job  xxxviii.  7. 
i.  6.  ii.  1.,  and  it  is  known  that  the  sons  of  kings  have  been  styled 

*  [See  <>  80,  81.  of  this  part.     Tr.] 


422    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

sons  of  God,  or  of  the  gods  ;  the  practice  of  praying  three  times  a 
day  may  be  traced  in  Ps.  Iv.  18.  (17.);  that  of  turning  the  face 
towards  Jerusalem  while  worshipping,  in  T  Kings  viii.  38,  44,  48. 

Comp.  Dan.  vi.  11.  (10  ) It  is  true  that  Shushan  was  first  made 

the  royal  residence  under  the  Persian  monarchs,  but  Herodotus  and 
Strabo  both  declare  that  it  was  a  very  ancient  city,  belonging  origin- 
ally to  the  kingdom  of  the  Chaldeans,  so  that  Daniel  might  have 
gone  there  for  some  cause,  viii  2. But  to  examine  all  the  objec- 
tions of  this  kind  which  have  been  offered  is  inconsistent  with  the 
limits  of  this  v?ork. 

§  154.     Origin  and  Condition  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 

The  book  of  Daniel  is  a  collection  of  writings  which  had  been  at 
first  com.tosed  and  published  separately.  The  first  six  chapters  con- 
tain besides  the  exordium,  four  documents  c.  v.  being  closely  con- 
nected with  c.  vi.     The  last  six  contain  also  four  pieces,  for  c.  x.  xi. 

and  xii.  present  only  one  vision. The  assertion  of  the  Talmudists 

in  Baba  Bathra,  c.  i  ,  that  the  men  of  the  great  synagogue  wrote 
(ono)  Ezekiel,  the  twelve  minor  prophets,  Daniel,  and  the  book  of 

Esther,  imdnnbtedly  lifiRans  no  more  than  that  they  reduced  these 
writings  into  order,  which  is  evident  from  the  twelve  prophets ;  nor 
must  it  be  omitted,  that  the  Talmudists  reckon  even  Daniel  himself 

among  the  members  of  this  synagogue. The  Alexandrine  version 

varies  constantly  from  our  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  text.  This  is  the 
case  not  only  in  c.  iii — vi.  but  even  as  early  as  i.  20.  an  addition  is 
found  in  that  version  and  in  ix.  25,  27,  several  omissions,  transposi- 
tions and  alterations,  are  observable  :  yet  the  disagreement  is  more 
frequent  in  iii — vi.,  and  in  iii  iv.  it  is  exceedingly  great.  Some  wri- 
ters have  observed  in  iii — vi.  a  difference  in  the  method  of  transla- 
ting, which,  however,  I  cannot  discover.  This  discrepancy  of  the 
Alexandrine  version  is  thought  by  some  to  show,  that  these  different 
parts  were  written  on  separate  rolls,  whence  a  twofold  recension  of 
some  would  have  arisen,  the  one  purer,  contained  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible,  and  the  other  altered  and  interpolated,  used  by  the  Alexan- 
drine translator  of  iii — vi.  whom  they  suppose  to  have  been  a  differ- 
ent person  from  the  translator  of  the  other  parts  of  Daniel.     But 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  423 

some  of  the  discrepancies  may  with  more  probability  be  ascribed  to 
the  translator,  as  the  omission  of  the  officers  in  iii.  3.*  whose  names 
had  been  previously  introduced  in  ».  2,  of  the  musical  mstruments  in 
V.  15,  which  had  already  been  mentioned  twice,  v.  5.  and  7  ;  also  the 
omission  of  iv.  3 — 6  •  and  the  transposition  of  the  8th  verse,  are  un- 
doubtedly to  be  ascribed  to  the  translator.  Other  varieties  which 
disturb  the  order  or  the  sense  proceed  from  negligence  in  the  tran- 
scribers of  the  Alexandrine  version,  as  when  in  c.  v.  v.  1,  4,  and  5, 
occur  first,  then  the  words  written  on  the  wall,  and  at  length  the  first 
five  verses  are  repeated.  A  similar  instance  occurs  in  v.  6.,  when, 
after  the  account  of  the  terrified  king  it  is  added,  that  the  lords 
vaunted  themselves  ;  and  also  in  the  version  of  iii.  21,  which  is  en- 
tirely destitute  of  meaning.  Comp.  iv  32,  34.  The  discrepancies 
of  the  4th  chapter  from  the  Chaldee  text,  and  the  prolix  additions  in 
iii.  and  iv.  cannot  be  satisfactorily  explained  by  tracing  them  to  tran- 
scribers or  to  some  other  account  of  the  same  subject,  because  the 
rest  of  that  part  agrees  even  verbally  with  the  Chaldee  text.  They 
seem  rather  to  have  come  down  from  the  translator,  who  like  the 
Chaldee  paraphrasts,  took  liberties  with  the  text,  and  perhaps  even 
added  the  designation  of  time  in  iii.  1.  and  iv.  l.[a] 

[a)  Whether  there  were  two  recensions  of  the  original  text  of  Daniel, 
1  do  not  venture  to  determine,  but  I  must  confess  that  it  does  not  appear 
to  me  to  be  probable,  since  we  have  similar  additions  in  the  Alexandrine 
translation  of  Esther  and  of  Job,  which  have  never  existed  in  Hebrew, 
but  are  certainly  of  Greek  original.  It  seems  most  probable,  that  the 
old  Greek  Jews  introduced  such  additions  into  their  translation,  as  after- 
wards the  Hebrew  Jews  made  similar  additions  in  their  Targums.] 

*  [See  Daniel,  p.  12.  ubi  sup.  ^  147,  p.  405.     TV.] 


4;^  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH   BOOK 


CHAPTER  V 


OP   THE   PROPHETS   WHO    LIVED    AFTER   THE    CAPTIVITV. 


§  155.      Time  of  Haggai. 
Haggai,  ''jn,  Ayycuos,  prophesied  during  the  reign  of  Darius  Hys- 

taspes,  who  mounted  the  Persian  throne  in  521,  B.  C.  The  Hebrews 
had  already  in  the  year  536,  B.  C.  returned  from  captivity,  and  had 
rebuilt  Jerusalem,  and  had  begun  to  build  the  temple  in  the  year  535, 
B.  C.  but  had  been  prevented  from  finishing  it  by  the  Samaritans, 
who  obtained  an  edict  from  the  Pseudo-Smerdis.  forbidding  them  to 
proceed.  In  the  mean  time  they  built  splendid  houses,  and  pretended 
tliat  the  time  for  rebuilding  the  temple  had  not  arrived  supposing  the 
seventy  years  predicted  by  Jeremiah  to  apply  to  the  temple  also,  from 
the  time  of  the  destruction  of  which  it  was  then  the  68th  year.  As  on 
the  death  of  the  Pseudo-Smerdis,  and  the  consequent  termination  of 
his  interdict  they  still  continued  to  wait  for  the  end  of  the  70  years, 
Haggai  began  to  prophesy  in  the  second  year  of  Darius,  520,  B.  C. 

§  156.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Haggai. 

The  book  comprises  four  discourses,  of  which  in  all  probabiUty  we 
have  only  an  epitome.*  1.  The  prophet  exhorts  the  Jews  to  prosecute 
the  building  of  the  temple,  which  is  done,  c.  i.    Comp.  Ezra  v.  i. — 

vi.  15. 2)  The  old  men  who  in  their  youth  had  seen  the  temple  of 

Solomon,  and  were  now  expressing  their  grief  at  the  great  inferiority 
of  the  new  building,  are  comforted  by  the  promise  that  aftei  a  re- 
markable revolution  of  affairs   (under  Alexander)  this  temple  would 

•*  [So  EicHHORN,  Einleit.  ^  598..— 3V.} 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  425 

become  much  more  magnificent,  because  the  gills  of  the  Gentiles 

would  be  brought  thither,*  ii.  1 — 9. 3.)     The  prophet  predicts 

that  now,  since  the  Jews  had  washed  out  the  crime  which  they  had 
contracted  by  neglecting  the  temple,  the  seasons  should  be  productive, 

ii.  10 — 19. 4.)     He  announces  to  Zerubbabel,  that  the  prophecy 

in  ii.  1 — 9.  related  to  a  great  pohtical  revolution,  (the  overthrow  of 
the  Persian  monarchy,)  before  which  Zerubbabel  should  be  removed 
by  death,  ii.  20 — 23. 

Jerome,  in  the  Vulgate  version,  has  rendered  Hag.  ii.  7.  somewhat 
incorrectly,    "  veniet    desideratus    cunctis  gentibus."      For   1)  i|X2 

mon  does  not  refer  to  a  person,  but  as  the  verb  is  plural  and  the  noun 

singular,  the  latter  must  be  taken  in  a  collective  sense.  2)  The  ab- 
stract niDn,  desire,  is  put  in  phrases  of  this  kind  for  the  object  of  de- 
sire, and  signifies  what  is  desirable,  i)recious  things,  treasures,  as  may 
be  seen  by  comparing  I  Sam.  ix.  20.  Gen.  xlix.  26.  H  Chron.  xxxii. 
27.  Jer.  xxv.  34.  Hos.  xiii.  15.  Nah.  ii.  10.  (9.)  3)  The  subject 
which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the  prophecy  is  the  splendour  of  the 
temple.  4)  The  series  of  the  discourse  requires  that  the  7th  verse 
should  be  explained  of  the  riches  and  magnijicence  of  the  temple.  The 
meaning  is  therefore  this, — that  the  temple  should  be  rendered  very 
magnificent  by  the  accession  of  the  treasures  of  the  Gentiles.  [«] 

[a]  Admitting  the  author's  first  and  second  observations,  the  prophet 
may  still  have  in  view  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  and  the  conversion  of 
the  Gentiles ;  and  neither  the  subject  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the 
prophecy,  nor  the  series  of  the  discourse,  will  give  any  difficulty  to  one 
who  knows,  that  the  coming  of  the  Messiah  was  a  prominent  subject  in 
the  minds  of  the  Hebrews,  and  that  their  prophets  often  look  forward  to 
that  event,  and  to  those  connected  with  it,  as  the  ultimate  object  of  their 
predictions.  Even  Rosenmiiller  acknowledges,  that  the  prophet  enter- 
tained the  hope  of  his  prediction  being  verified  in  the  time  of  the  Messiah. 
See  Schol.  Proph.  Min.  vol.  IV.  p.  100.  On  the  text  see  J.  H.  Michae- 
LIS,  Bib.  Hebraic,  in  loc. 

In  all  probability  this  passage  refers,  1st,  to  the  beautification  of  the 
second  temple  by  the  treasures  of  the  Gentiles,  metaphorically  termed 
Iheir  desire  ;  and,  2dly,  to  the  still  greater  glory  conferred  on  it  by  the 

♦  [And  because,  after  eartraordinary  revolutions,  the  Messiah  should  make  his  ap- 
pearance, and  establish  a  dominion  never  to  be  destroyed.  Tr.] 

54 


42t)  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

presence  of  the  Messiah  (comp.  Mai.  iii.  1.)  to  whom  the  Gentiles  should 
seek,  Isa.  si.  10.  Ix.  3.  The  terms  are  carefully  chosen  so  as  to  admit  of 
this  double  application,  and  the  great  solemnity  of  the  introduction,  v.  6, 
7,  together  with  the  reference  to  this  passage,  Heb.  xii.  26,  s.  seems  tore- 
niiire  it.  See  Newcome's  minor  prophets,  note  in  loc.     Tr.] 

§  157.     Style  of  Haggai. 

The  style  of  Haggai  in  reproving  is  indeed  vehement,  but  by  no 
means  poetic.  There  are  passages  however,  where  he  treats  of  fu- 
ture events,  in  which  he  becomes  somewhat  elevated.  The  lan- 
guage approximates  to  the  Chaldee  dialect,  and  labours  under  a  po- 
verty of  terms,  as  may  be  observed  in  the  constant  repetition  of  the 
same  expressions.    Comp.  i.  5,  7.  ii.  16,  18.  also  i.  13.  and  ii.  4.  [a] 

[a]    See  also  the  expression  niX^V  Hin'  DW,  i.  2,  5,  7,  14.  ii.  4,  6,  7, 

T  :  T       •  \  ; 

S,  9,  11,  23. ;  and  the  division  of  his  auditory  into  Joshua,  Zerubbabel, 
and  the  residue  of  the  people,  i.  12,  14.  ii.  2,  4.  Eichhorn,  J  599,  at- 
tributes these  repetitions  to  an  attempt  at  ornament,  rendering  the  writer 
disposed  frequently  to  recur  to  a  favourite  expression.     Tr.~\ 

§  158.  Time  of  Zeckariali. 
Zechariah,  rT'lDi^  the  son  of  Barachiah,  the  son  of  Iddo,  was  con- 
temporary with  Haggai.  In  the  first  chapters  of  his  book,  he  treats 
of  the  same  subject  with  that  prophet,  urging  the  Jews  to  rebuild  the 
temple,  and  is  therefore  mentioned  in  Ezra  v.  1.  vi.  14.  His  being 
called  in  these  places  the  son  of  Iddo,  and  his  father's  name  being 
omitted,  is  nothing  but  an  instance  of  the  imperfect  genealogy  com- 
mon among  the  orientals,  and  intimates  that  his  grandfather  was  more 
celebrated  than  his  father. 

§  159.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  ZeciiariaJi. 

[The  book  consists  of  two  parts.  The  first  of  these  refers  in  ge- 
neral to  events  shortly  to  take  place,  c.  i — viii ;  the  second  contains 
predictions  of  remote  periods,  c.  ix — xiv. 

The  introduction  is  an  exhortation  to  the  Hebrews  who  had  re- 
turned from  exile,  to  guard  against  those  sins  which  had  drawn  so 
much  distress  upon  their  ancestors,  i.  1 — 6,     This  is  followed  bv 


1>F    THE    OLD    TESTAMEM.  I'll 

right  visions,  which  relate  to  the  happy  completion  of  the  temple, 
and  to  the  divine  protection  which  the  Jews  were  to  enjoy. 

1)  A  rider  appears  on  a  roan  horse.*  The  colour  was  considered 
as  particularly  beautiful,  (Koran,  Sura  II.  64.),  and  therefore  the 
rider  represents  a  person  of  distinction.  He  is  in  the  recess  among 
the  myrtles,  no  doubt  in  the  low  country  of  Judea  on  the  sea,  and  is 
followed  by  other  riders  on  roan,  sorrel  and  white  horses,  who  bring 
intelligence  that  all  is  at  rest.  The  meaning  of  this  image  is  imme- 
diately added,  namely,  God  protects  Judea  and  gives  rest  to  the  land, 
that  the  temple  and  city  may  be  built,  and  the  inhabitants  enjoy  pros- 
perity, i.  7 — 17. 2)  The  prophet  sees  four  horns,  it  would  seem, 

over  a  hill  which  concealed  the  two  wild  bullocks  to  whom  they  be- 
longed. The  four  horns  are  then  tamed  and  overthrown  by  four 
smiths  or  carpenters.  This  is  a  figure  of  the  Assyrian  and  Chaldean 
powers,  which  had  captured  and  dispersed  the  Israelites  and  Jews, 
but  which  had  been  destroyed,  and  should  never  again  injure  the  He- 
brews, ii.  1 — 4,  (i.  18 — 21.) 3)  A  man  appears  with  a  measuring 

rod  to  measure  Jerusalem,  and  it  is  announced  that  this  city  shall  be- 
come great  and  populous  by  the  return  of  many  from  captivity,  and 
by  the  conversion  of  many  of  the  Heathen.  This  was  verified  after 
the  time  of  Alexander  and  particularly  under  the  Asmonaean  princes, 
ii.  5 — 17.  (ii.  1 — 13.) 4)  The  high  priest  Joshua  stands  in  mourn- 
ing vestments  before  a  messenger  of  God  or  an  angel,  and  on  his 
right  hand  is  the  accuser.  The  latter  is  driven  away,  and  Joshua,  in 
token  of  his  innocence,  is  clothed,  agreeably  to  eastern  usage,  with 
honourable  garments.  This  is  intended  to  represent  that  the  Persian 
officers  and  others  who  accused  the  Jews  of  rebuilding  the  temple 
would  not  be  able  to  procure  a  prohibition,  and  that  Joshua  who  pro- 
moted the  work,  and  his  posterity,  should  preside  in  the  temple  and 
over  the  people,  who  should   become  entirely  independent ;  which 

was  the  case  under  the  Maccabees,  c.  iii. 5)  This  vision  exhibits 

a  golden  candlestick  with  seven  lamps,  and  two  small  olive  trees  one 
on  each  side  of  it.  This  is  a  figure  of  the  happy  completion  of  the 
temple  and  final  setting  up  of  the  golden  candlestick  in  the  holy 


*  [With  relation  to  the  expositions  which  follow,  the  reader  is  once  more  reminded 
of  the  remark  made  in  the  preface  and  in  a  note  on  p.  409.     Tr.] 


428    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

place,  through  the  aid  afforded  by  the  prophets,  without  any  assist- 
ance of  a  forcible  kind.  The  two  olive  trees  are  not  clearly  ex- 
plained, but  they  appear  to  be  emblematic  of  Haggai  and  Zechariah, 

c.  iv. 6)  A  great  roll  of  a  book,  written  on  both  sides  with  curses 

against  thieves  and  perjured  persons,  appears  flying  in  the  air  ;  to 
denote  that  these  crimes  should  be  punished  and  no  more  rule  in  the 

land,  V.  1 — 4. 7)  The  prophet  sees  an  ephah  in  which  sits  the 

fury  of  wickedness,  who  is  pressed  down  with  a  piece  of  lead  over 
the  mouth  of  the  ephah,  and  thus  is  borne  by  two  female  figures  with 
wings  of  hawks  [or  storks]  through  the  air  to  Babylonia.  This  is  a 
figure  of  the  use  of  false  measures,  a  crime  for  which  the  Jews  were 
punished  in  Babylon,  and  which  should  no  more  become  prevalent, 
V.  b — 1 1 . 8)  Four  chariots  come  out  from  between  two  moun- 
tains of  brass,  and  on  them  the  four  winds  of  heaven  ride.  These 
are  Magian  representations  of  the  tutelary  spirit  of  war,  Behram. 
Comp.  Herod.  I.  131.  Zend-Avesta,  II.  Th.  S.  171—278.  Ap- 
pendix to  Zend-Avesta,  I.  Band,  I.  Th.  S.  320.  f.  Not.  92.  The 
first  chariot  with  pale  red  horses  is  appointed  to  go  to  and  fro  on  the 
earth,  representing  the  long  wars  against  the  Greeks  ;  the  second 
with  black  horses  goes  towards  the  north,  being  emblematic  of  the 
attack  and  conquest  of  Babylon  by  Darius,  that  city  lying  northeast 
trora  Jerusalem  and  northwest  from  Persia  ;  the  third  with  white 
horses,  behind  the  second,  represents  the  expedition  of  Darius 
against  Thrace  ;  the  fourth  with  spotted  horses  towards  the  south, 
refers  to  his  expedition  against  Egypt.  The  whole  tends  to  this 
point,  that  during  these  wars  the  Jews  should  enjoy  rest,  vi.  1 — 8. 

In  vi.  9 — 15,  the  prophet  is  commanded  to  make  two  crowns  of 
silver  and  gold  and  to  place  them  upon  the  head  of  Joshua  the  high- 
priest,  at  the  same  time  announcing  his  future  greatness,  and  that 
hereafter  the  crowns  of  the  high-priesthood  and  of  the  kingdom  should 
be  united  ;  as  a  pledge  of  which  the  two  crowns  should  be  k^pt  in 
the  temple.  This  illustrates  what  was  said  before  in  iii.  1..  8.  and 
was  fulfilled  under  the  Asmonaeans  400  years  afl;erwards,  and  could 
not  have  been  foreseen  by  mere  human  wisdom. 

Chapters  vii.  and  viii.  belong  to  the  fourth  year  of  Darius,  516 
B.  C,  and  relate  in  the  first  place  questions  which  some  respectable 
Jews  had  pent  to  Jerusalem  to  be  answered,  with  reference  to  the 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  429 

observance  of  certain  fasts  and  feasts.  The  prophet  answers  that 
these  observances  had  no  necessary  connexion  with  religion,  and  that 
God  had  already  by  former  prophets  declared  righteousness  and  vir- 
tue to  be  what  he  required  and  that  for  neglecting  to  follow  this  in- 
struction, the  city  and  country  had  been  wasted  vii  ;  but  that  now 
God  would  again  be  gracious,  and  .lerusalem  should  become  popu- 
lous, and  as  former  times  had  been  urr'  opitious,  fruitful  oc.^sons 
should  now  follow  viii.  1  — 17.  comp.  Hag.  ii.  11.  ss.  The  people 
should  conduct  themselves  righteously,  their  fasts  be  turned  into  days 
of  rejoicing,  and  multitudes  of  proselytes  be  added  to  the  nation, 
18—23. 

The  second  part  consists  of  two  divisions.  In  the  former,  ix — xi, 
the  prophet  first  predicts  the  expedition  of  Alexander  through  Syria 
and  Palestine  into  Egypt  and  his  return,  when  Jerusalem  would  be 
preserved  uninjured.  He  sees  in  remote  futurity  the  union  of  the 
Philistines  with  the  Jews,  and,  still  more  remote,  the  Messiah,  ix. 
1 — 10.  Then  he  describes  the  time  of  the  Maccabees,  and  names 
expressly  the  Greeks  as  enemies  whom  the  Jews  should  vanquish. 
Those  who  formerly  belonged  to  the  kingdom  of  Judah  are  to  act  the 
principal  part  in  these  wars,  but  others  also  who  belonged  to  Israel 
shall  be  delivered,  and  many  return  from  foreign  countries  ix.  1 1 — 
X.  12.  In  the  next  chapter  the  prophet  depicts  the  last  times  of  this 
new  Jewish  kingdom.  He  begins  with  an  allegory  1 — 3,  and  repre- 
sents its  application  by  two  symbols,  4 — 17,  the  first  of  which  (12, 
13.)  appears  to  contain  some  traces  of  the  Messiah,  but  afterwards, 
like  the  second  symbol,  it  represents  the  revolt  against  the  Romans, 
the  parties  of  the  leaders,  and  the  complete  destruction  of  all  order. 

The  latter  division,  xii — xiv.  treats  again  of  the  times  of  the  Mac- 
cabees. Jerusalem  shall  become  to  its  enemies  like  a  cup  of  intoxi- 
cation, like  a  great  stone  which  should  injure  them  in  attempting  to 
lift  it ;  the  city  shall  not  be  entirely  destroyed  as  it  was  formerly  by 
the  Chaldeans,  and  the  Jews  will  thankfully  acknowledge  the  divine 
protection,  xii.  1 — 5.  They  shall  extend  and  make  conquests  to- 
wards the  south  and  the  north  ;  Judea,  not  Jerusalem,  shall  be  first 
victorious,  yet  afterwards  the  inhabitants  of  the  latter  shall  show 
themselves  like  heroes,  and  all  the  people  that  oppose  them  shall  be 
destroyed,  6 — 9.     God  will  then  spread  lamentation  among  the  inha- 


430     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

bitants  of  Jerusalem  ;  they  will  look  to  him,  on  account  of  him  whom 
they  have  pierced  through.  A  fountain  to  cleanse  away  sins  and  im- 
purity shall  be  opened  and  no  idols,  prophets  or  soothsayers  shall 
any  more  be  found,  10 — xiii.  6.  The  shepherd,  who  is  nearest  to 
God,  shall  be  slain  with  the  sword,  and  the  flock  shall  be  scattered,  7. 
This  shepherd,  and  he  who  is  before  said  to  be  pierced  through,  are 
the  same  person,  Judas  Maccabeus,  but  the  prophecy  is  so  con- 
structed, as  to  represent  the  Messiah  figuratively. Then  the  pro- 
phet sees  again  the  commencement  of  the  Maccabean  times,  and 
takes  in  their  complete  extent.  Through  the  whole  country  two- 
thirds  should  be  slain,  and  the  remainder  tried  like  silver  and  gold  in 
a  furnace,  would  be  found  sincere  worshippers  of  God  and  be  pro- 
tected by  him  v.  8,  9.  Jerusalem  shall  be  taken,  but  God  will  pre- 
serve the  Jews,  and  a  great  revolution  shall  take  place,  by  which  they 
shall  free  themselves  from  the  Syrian  kingdom.  This  is  represented, 
as  if  God  stood  on  the  mount  of  Ohves,  which  divided  under  his  feet, 
so  that  one  part  moved  to  the  north  and  the  other  to  the  south,  and 
produced  a  great  valley, as  a  day  of  a  peculiar  kmd,  which  is  pro- 
perly neither  day  nor  night,  when  the  light  shall  first  appear  at  even- 
ing, (this  independence  was  extorted  from  the  enemy  late,) as  an 

abundant  fountain,  rising  from  Jerusalem,  and  flowing  partly  to  the 
Dead  Sea  and  partly  to  the  Mediterranean,  the  mountainous  country 
about  Jerusalem  becoming  a  plain,  (that  is,  all  the  obstructions  to 
this  happy  result  shall  be  removed,)  xiv.  1 — 11.  The  nations,  and 
particularly  the  Syrian  kingdom,  shall  be  destroyed,  as  a  hving  body 
that  begins  to  decay,  (meaning,  by  intestine  wars.)  The  neighbour- 
ing people  will  then  in  large  numbers  become  Jews,  such  as  refuse 
will  be  punished,  the  knowledge  of  God  will  spread,  and  Jerusalem 
become  a  holy  city,  12 — 21.] 

§   160.     Style  of  Zechariah. 

In  the  former  part  of  the  book,  the  future  is  generally  represented 
in  visions,  which  are  explained  by  a  few  intimations,  not  given  as  in 
Ezekiel,  by  God,  but,  a  in  Daniel,  by  an  angel  who  however  does 
not  communicate  information  without  being  interrogated.  The  sym- 
bols are  not  so  bold  and  grand  as  in  Daniel  nor  are  they  clothed  witli 
all  the  circumstances  that  belong  to  them,  as  in  Ezekiel,  but  some 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  431 

things  are  occasionally  left  to  be  supplied  by  the  reader.  Comp.  i. 
8 — 11.  ii.  1,  2.  iii.  1 — 4.  iv.  1 — 14.  v.  1 — 5.  The  descriptions  of 
these  symbols  are  necessarily  prosaic,  but  c  vii  and  viii.,  containing 
neither  visions  nor  symbols,  are  in  a  more  elevated  style.  The  latter 
part  of  the  book  is  indeed  poetical,  but  it  is  not  composed  in  that 
strain  of  poejic  rapture  which  is  observable  in  other  more  ancient 
prophets.  Many  novel  and  elegant  tropes  and  allegories  occur,  but 
they  are  not  always  quite  in  character  with  the  nature  of  the  things 
from  which  they  are  drawn,  nor  are  they  all  completely  delineated. 
Comp.  ix.  13,  16-  16.  x.  3.  xi.  17.  In  the  11th  chapter,  which  con- 
tains more  visions  or  symbols,  the  style  is  again  less  ornate  and  almost 
prosaic.  Throughout  the  whole  book  the  language  is  intermingled 
with  very  few  Chaldaisms,  but  difficult  expressions  very  frequently 
occur.  See  i.  7,  8.  ii.  12.  v.  11.  vin.  2,  3.  viii.  12,  16.  ix.  8,  9. 
xii.  6. 

§  161.  Whether  Zechariah  is  the  author  of  the  second  part. 

In  the  present  day,  many  writers  deny  that  the  last  six  chapters 
were  vpritten  by  Zechariah,  some  supposing  them  to  be  more  ancient 
and  others  more  modern  than  his  time.  That  those  two  prophecies 
in  ix — xi.,  and  xii — xiv.,  were  written  by  one  and  the  same  author,  is 
shown  by  the  identity  of  language  and  style  in  both  and  is  confirmed 
by  certain  particular  representations  common  to  both.  There  the 
leaders  who  oppress  the  people  are  called  sheep  merchants,  ''jjrj^ 

JK2fn  not  only  in  c.  xiv.  21,  but  also  in  c.  xi.  7,   11,  where  the  two 

words  ''jy  pS  and  """j;;  |3  ought  undoubtedly  to  be  joined  together, 

and  read  according  to  the  Alexandrine  translation,  "iyjoS  and  "j;?J3, 

thus  corresponding  with  xiv.  21. That  those  prophecies  were  both 

VPritten  in  Zechariah's  Age,  is  evident  from  the  condition  of  the  peo- 
ple and  of  Jerusalem,  which  accords  with  that  described  by  Zechariah 
in  the  former  chapters,  and  by  his  contemporary  Haggai,  the  Jews 
being  yet  but  a  feeble  colony,  which  in  a  future  age  was  to  become 
warlike  and  more  powerful  and  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem  being 
few  in  number,  who  were  afterwards  to  become  numerous.     The 


132  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

very  title  in  xii.  \.,  on  Israel,  agreeing  with  that  in  Mai.  i.  1.  be- 
speaks an  age  posterior  to  the  captivity. 

They  who  maintain  that  these  prophecies  are  more  ancient[a]  argue 
thus.  1)  l^he  language,  style,  and  ornate  character  of  the  work  show 
that  it  was  written  before  the  captivity.  But  it  has  been  before  seen 
(§  160.),  that  the  style  is  not  without  indications  of  a  more  modern  age, 
and  the  style  of  c.  vii.  viii.,  which  belong  to  the  first  part,  is  considera- 
bly elevated. [&] 2)  In  ix.  10,  13.  x.  6.  Judah  and  Jerusalem  are 

placed  in  opposition  to  Ephraim  and  Joseph,  as  is  the  case  before  the 
captivity.  But  the  same  is  also  observed  in  the  first  part,  c.  viii.  13, 
and  in  Jeremiah,  xxx.  4,  long  after  the  overthrow  of  the  kingdom  of 
Israel.  Zechariah  in  the  places  referred  to  could  not  avoid  this  opposi- 
tion, because  he  predicts  that  very  many  of  the  ten  tribes  should  in  a  fu- 
ture age  return  to  Palestine  and  in  x.  6.  he  adds,  that  in  the  time  of 
the  Maccabees  the  descendants  of  the  ten  tribes  should  be  protected 
by  the  tribe  of  Judah  and  obtain  places  of  residence,  and  at  length 

become  themselves  bold   warriors. 3)  In  x.  2,  xiii.  2 — 6,  idols 

and  false  prophets  are  mentioned,  of  which  there  were  none  after  the 
captivity.  But  Zechariah  is  not  blaming  idolatry  and  soothsaying  as 
existing  in  his  own  time  ;  he  is  predicting  that  in  the  future  age  of 
which  he  speaks,  these  superstitions  should  have  no  existence,  as  he 
elsewhere  frequently  declares,  that  the  worship  of  God  should  be  con- 
stant. The  very  passage  adduced,  xiii.  2 — 6,  contains  proof  of  a  more 
modern  origin,  in  the  use  of  the  expression,  nx  •  D  nn,  impure  spirit. 

to  signify  the  soul  of  a  dead  person,  which  was  unknown  in  a  more 
ancient  period.  To  this  may  be  added  the  use  of  more  modern  or- 
thography, similar  to  that  in  the  books  of  Chronicles,  as  T^'^  for  nn  in 

xii.  7,  8,9,  10,  12.  xiii.  1. 

They  who  wish  to  show  that  these  prophecies  are  more  modern 
than  Zechariah,  and  therefore  allege  that  the  events  predicted  are  too 
remote  from  his  time,  rely  upon  the  supposition  that  the  prophets  fore- 
tel  those  events  only  which  are  near  at  hand.  But  this  opinion  has 
been  already  proved  to  be  untrue,*  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  urge  that 
Zechariah,  even  in  the  first  part,  vi.  9 — 15,  promises  to  the  high  priest 
a  royal  diadem,  which  was  first  obtained  in  a  very  distant  period.     In 

*  fSee  $  77.  p.  298.  ss.| 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  433 

line,  the  character  of  the  language  and  composition  of  these  prophecies 
is  entirely  at  variance  with  a  more  modern  date. 

Although  these  prophecies  are  neither  more  ancient  nor  more  mo- 
dern than  Zechariah,  it  may  still  admit  of  inquiry,  whether  he  is  their 
author,  because  their  style  is  poetical,  while  that  of  the  first  part  is 
prosaic.  But  whatever  this  diversity  of  style  may  be,  it  can  never 
induce  a  judicious  critic  to  ascribe  these  parts  to  different  authors  : 
for  Hosea  also  uses  prosaic  style  in  c.  i.  and  iii.  and  poetical  in  c.  ii. 
and  in  iv — xiv.  In  both  prophets  the  same  reason  gives  rise  to  the 
diversity,  for  Hosea  in  c.  i,  and  iii.  and  Zechariah  in  c.  i — vi.  relate 
symbols,  which  do  not  admit  the  poetical  style.  Zechariah  in  the  first 
eight  chapters  admonishes  and  consoles,  and  speaks  almost  always  of 
events  near  at  hand  ;  while  in  the  last  six  he  predicts  events  much 
more  remote,  to  which  the  poetical  style  is  better  adapted.  Still  both 
parts  have  much  in  common  :  for  instance,  a  want  of  finish  in  tropes 
and  allegories,  which  are  also  sometimes  rather  unnatural ;  symbols  and 
visions,  which  are  frequent  in  the  first  part,  occur  also  in  c.  xi. ;  the 
language  throughout  is  not  entirely  free  from  Chaldaisms,  and  is  some- 
what harsh  ;  the  style  also  of  the  former  part  is  more  vehement^  where 
symbols  or  visions  are  not  related,  and  it  is  less  so  in  the  latter  (xi.). 
where  symbols  are  introduced.  Indeed  the  very  phraseology  wliich 
we  meet  with  in  the  one,  is  often  found  in  the  other.  Comp.  ii.  14. 
(10,)  with  ix.  9.  ;  ii.  10.  (6,)  with  ix.  12,  13  ;  vii.  14.  with  ix.  8. 
The  extraordinary  legate,  or  angel,  who  speaks  in  the  person  of  Je- 
hovah in  ii,  12 — 15.  (8 — 11)  iii.  I — 7,  assumes  the  same  character 
in  xi.  4 — 13.  which  occurs  elsewhere  only  in  a  few  passages  of  scrip- 
ture. The  reason  why  some  things  which  are  to  be  met  with  in  the 
first  part  are  wanting  in  the  second,  lies  in  the  diff"erence  of  the  sub- 
ject and  of  the  style  or  species  of  composition.  Thus,  for  instance, 
angels  do  not  appear  in  the  second  part,  because  no  visions  are  rela- 
ted ;  the  notation  of  time  in  i.  1,  7.  vii.  1.  is  wanting  in  the  second 
part,  because  the  subject  relates  to  a  distant  period,  and  no  doubt 
could  possibly  be  suggested,  as  to  the  prophecy's  being  written  after 
the  fact  referred  to  ;  the  forms,  thus  saith  Jehovah,  the  word  of  Jehovah 
came,  it  was  the  word  of  Jehovah,  were  better  adapted  to  the  popular 
discourses  of  the  former  part,  than  they  would  have  been  to  the  poetry 
of  the  latter,  the  force  of  which  they  would  have  weakened,     Thev 

55 


434    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  KACH  BOOK 

are  not,  however,  entirely  wanting  in  this  part,  but  they  occur  more 
rarely,  and  are  to  be  met  with  chiefly  in  the  1 1  th  chapter,  which  con- 
tains symbols  and  a  less  elevated  style  of'writing,  Seexi.  4, 11,13,  15. 
also  xiii.  8.  Where  they  are  used  elsewhere,  ix.  1.  xii.  1 .  they  are  inter- 
changed with  the  forms,  the  emnunciation  or  declaration*  of  the  word 
of  Jehovah,  mn''  im  mo.     Lastly,  the  notice  in  ii.  13,  15.  (9,  11,) 

iv.  9.  vi.  15.,  that  the  result  of  the  prophecy  should  prove  the  author's 
divine  mission,  occurs  again  in  the  latter  part,  xi.  11.  [c] 

[a)  This  is  the  opinion  of  Bjertholdt,  Einleit.  IV.  1722,  and  De 
Wette,  Einleit.  ^  250.  They  both  suppose  these  prophecies  to  be  the 
productions  of  several  authors,  living  at  diflFerent  times.  Such  is  also  the 
opinion  of  Newcome,  Improved  Version,  &c.  of  the  minor  prophets,  note 
on  Zech.  ix.  (p.  303.  ss.  ed.  Pontefract,  1809,)  where  a  number  of  au- 
thorities are  adduced  in  its  support,  and  among  others  the  marginal  chro- 
nology of  the  authorized  version.     TV.] 

[6)  The  comparative  goodness  of  the  style  of  this  second  part  may  have 
arisen  from  the  acquaintance  of  the  author  with  the  writings  of  the  older 
prophets.  Traces  of  this  are  very  discernible  in  the  first  part  also,  comp. 
c.  vii.  7 — 14,  with  Isa.  Iviii.  1 — 14.  Jer.  xiv.  12.  Mic.  vi.  8;  c.  ii.  15.  (11.) 
with  Isa.  xiv.  1,  Ivi.  6 ;  c.  ii.  10, 11.  (6, 7.)  with  Isa.  lii.  11 ;  c.  ii.  14.  (10.) 
with  Isa.  xii.  7  (6)  ;  c.  i.  12.  with  J°r.  xxv.  11,  12.  xxix.  10.  In  the  se- 
cond part,  comp.  c.  xiv.  8.  ss.  with  Ezek.  xlvii.  1.  ss.;  c.  xii.  1.  with  Isa. 
xliv.  24.  Ii.  13. ;  c.  xi.  4 — 17,  with  Ezek.  sxxiv.  1 — 6 ;  c.  xiii.  8.  s.  with 
Ezek.  V.  1.  ss.;  c.  ix.  2.  s.  with  Ezek.  xxviii.  1.  TV.} 

[c)  The  genuineness  of  Zech.  ix — xiv.  has  been  proved  at  length  by 
KoESTER,  Meletemata  critica  et  exegetica  inZechariae  prophetse  partem 
posteriorem,  cap,  ix — xiv.  pro  tuenda  ejus  authentia,  8vo.  Gottinga, 
1819.  It  is  also  maintained  by  Beckhacs,  ueber  die  Integritat  der  pro- 
phetischen  Schriften  des  A.  T.  S.  240.  ff.  by  Rosenmueller,  Schol.  in 
Proph.  Min.  T.  IV.  p.  234.  ss.  (who  adopts  Jahn's  arguments)  and  by 
Bla-YNEy,  Trans,  of  Zech.  note  on  c.  ix.  p.  35.  ss.     TV.] 

>S  162.  Publication  of  the  Book  of  Zechariah. 
As  the  prophet  often  gives  notice  in  the  former  part  of  his 
work,  c.  ii.  13,  15.  iv.  9.  vi.  15.  viii.  6.  and  in  the  latter, 
c.  xi.  12.  (11.)  that  the  accomplishment  of  his  predictions  would 
show  his  divine  mission  ;  it  appears  that  his  annunciations  had 
been  discredited  by  his  contemporaries,  without  doubt  because  he 
published  the  second  part,  which  was  obscure  and  apparently  discrep- 

*  [In  our  English  Bibles  the  word  burden  is  used.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TKSTAMEM.  135 

ant  lu  some  things  from  more  ancient  prophecies,  before  the  first. 
Comp.  xiii.  8,  9.  xiv.  1,  2.  and  xi.,  where  he  predicts  the  utter  ruin  of 
all  order  among  the  Jevvg,  while  the  older  prophets  have  usually  des- 
cribed this  future  period  as  a  very  happy  one,  and  often  as  a  golden 
age.  In  order  therefore  to  secure  confidence  to  himself  as  a  prophet, 
he  was  favoured  with  those  revelations  which  are  described  in  the 
former  part  of  his  work,  the  fulfilment  of  which,  as  it  was  near  at  hand, 
would  convince  his  contemporaries  of  his  divine  mission.  But,  when 
he  pubHshed  the  whole  book  together,  he  placed  the  prophecies  which 
had  been  last  revealed  to  him  before  the  others,  that  the  reader  might 
be  prepared  for  what  was  to  follow. 

§  163.     Time  of  MalacM. 
That  Malachi,  OkSo,  was  a  contemporary  of  Neheraiah  was  the 

imvarying  opinion  of  the  ancients,  and  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt  by 
the  subject  of  the  book,  which  presents  the  same  face  of  things  as 
existed  in  Nehemiah's  time.  It  speaks  of  the  temple  as  having  been 
built  a  considerable  time  ; — it  introduces  the  Jews  complaining  of  the 
unfavourable  state  of  their  affairs  ; — it  finds  fault  with  the  heathen 
wives,  whom  Nehemiah  after  some  time  separated  fi-om  the  people- 
Neh.  xiii.  23 — 30. ; — it  censures  the  withholding  of  tithes,  which  was 
also  noticed  by  Nehemiah,  xiii.  5.  From  these  circumstances  it  ap- 
pears, that  Malachi  prophesied  in  the  time  of  Nehemiah  and  during 
his  second  residence  in  Judea,  about  4 1 2 — 408  before  Christ,  when 
he  reformed  the  abuses  before  mentioned.  This  is  confirmed  by 
Mai.  i.  1—5. 

§  164.     Contents  of  the  Booh. 

The  book  of  Malachi  consists  of  six  parts,  almost  all  of  which  re- 
late to  the  dissatisfaction  of  the  people  and  priests. 

1)  The  Jews  complained,  that  God  had  shown  them  no  particular 
favours  ;  to  which  the  pTophet  answers,  that  their  countiy  was  a  cUl- 
titSlted  larrd,  wMlst  that  of  the  Edomites  Was  laid  waste,  and  was  to 
be  still  further  devastated,  i.  1-^5.  This  was  done  by  the  PeVsiacn 
Armief!  that  marched  through  those  territories  against  the  revolting 


436         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

Egyptians. '2)  The  prophet  finds  fault  with  the  priests,  who  were 

constantly  complaining  of  the  multiplicity  of  their  labours  and  of  the 
smallness  of  their  income,  and  who  perverted  the  law  and  took  un- 
lawful sacrifices,  i.  6 — ii.  9. 3)  He  inveighs  against  the  Jews,  who 

repudiated  their  wives  at  pleasure,  and  married  foreigners,  ii.  10 — 16. 

4)  The  Jews  complained  that  the  Heathen  remained  unpunished, 

and  that  the  great  messenger,  the  Messiah,  who,  as  they  supposed, 
was  to  crush  the  Gentiles  and  subject  them  to  the  Jews,  did  not  make 
his  appearance.  Malachi  replies,  that  the  Messiah  would  come,  al- 
though not  to  punish  the  Gentiles,  but  the  Jews  and  particularly  the 
Levites  ;  and  that  he  would  be  preceded  by  a  messenger,  who  should 

prepare  his  way,  ii.  17 — iii.  6. 5)  He  declares  that  the  complaints 

which  were  made  of  the  sterility  of  the  ground  and  of  the  devastations 
of  locusts  were  idle,  so  long  as  they  defrauded  God  by  withholding 

the  tithes,  iii.  7 — 12. 6)  The  same  subject  is  pursued  as  that  in 

ii.  17 — iii.  6,  only  the  Jews  are  represented  as  saying,  that,  since  God 
did  not  send  the  Messiah  to  punish  the  Heathen,  it  was  unnecessary 
to  serve  him.  But  pious  men,  says  the  prophet,  entertain  more  cor- 
rect views  of  the  divine  justice,  and  such  shall  be  delivered  from  the 
punishment  which  God  will  hereafter  inflict  upon  the  Jews.  He  will 
send  a  messenger  to  precede  the  Messiah,  a  second  Elias,  who  will 
endeavour  to  produce  a  reformation  in  the  morals  of  the  people  ;  but 
at  length,  the  land  shall  be  condemned  to  an  irrevocable  curse.  This 
refers  to  the  Jewish  war  and  the  complete  devastation  of  the  country 
by  Titus,  iii.  13—24.  (iii.  13— iv.  6.) 

§  163.     Style  of  Malachi, 

Malachi  reproves  vice  in  vehement  language.  He  generally  brings 
forward  his  proposition  first,  then  adds  the  inquiry  of  the  people,  to 
which  he  afterwards  subjoins  an  answer,  [a]  His  style  is  mostly  pro- 
saic, and  his  language  is  sometimes  rather  harsh,  as  for  instance 
nbjy  NJK^  in  ii.  16,  where  '•JN  must  be  xmAersiooA,  I  hate  putting  away. 

He  uses  the  same  tropes  and  allegories  as  other  prophets.  Yet  he 
has  some  expressions  which  are  new,  as  where  the  Messiah  is  called 
the  lord  of  the  temple,  and  the  messenger  of  the  covenant,  iii.  1,  that  is, 
the  messenger  who  will  hereafter  estabhsh  a  covenant  with  the  He- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  437 

brews,  and  when  his  forerunner  is  designated  as  Elias,  iii.  23.  (iv.  5.) 
Comp.  Ex.  xxiii.  20 — 23.  xxiv.  1—3.  xxxiv.  28.  Deut.  v.  3.  ix.  9. 
Gen.  XV.  8 — 18.  xxii.  11 — 18,  and  my  Append.  Herm.  Fasc. 
I.  p.  17.  ss.[b] 

[a)  Comp.  i.  2.  6,  7.  ii.  14,  17.  iii.  7,  8,  13.     Tr.] 
[h)  Eichhorn  adduces  as  peculiarities,  the  thoughts  in  ii.  3.  and  iii.  2. 
and  the  phr  ises  njj>1  "^J?  ii.  12.  and  vSn  DJ^N  Xti/JI,  ii.  3.     In  common 

with  Haggai  and  Zechariah  he  uses  nO  for  ii'SJ,  c.  ii.  15.  s.  comp.  Hag. 

ii.  5.  ss.    Zech.  iv.  6.  ss;  nin"'  "l^T  HWD,  c.  i.  1.  comp.  Zech.  ix.  L 

xii.  1 ;  and  the  word  nn3,  c.  i.  8.  comp.  Hag.  i.  1,  &c.  Eichh.  Einleit. 

^  610.     7V.1 


43B    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


SECTION  III. 


or   THE   OTHER   POETICAL    BOOKS   OF    THE   OLD 
TESTAMENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 


OF   THE    PSALMS. 


§  166.     Date  of  the  Psalms. 

It  is  plain  from  Jos.  x.  13.  and  11  Sam.  i.  18,  that  the  Hebrews  had 
poems  and  collections  of  poems  which  were  sacred  long  before  David's 
time,  and  some  slight  remains  of  them  are  still  extant  in  Exod. 
XV.,  Deut.  xxxii.,  Judg.  v.,  I  Sam.  ii.,  Jos.  x.  12 — 14  The  PsaUns, 
0''bnn,  belong  principally  to  the  ages  which  elapsed  between  the  time 

of  David  and  the  Babylonian  captivity  ;  it  is  a  matter  of  dispute 
whether  some  of  them  are  more  ancient  than  this  period  ;  some  are 
certainly  more  modern,  but  it  cannot  be  proved  by  sufficient  argu- 
ments^ that  any  are  as  recent  as  the  age  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and 
the  Maccabees. — David's  name  being  prefixed  to  the  collection  only 
shows  that  he  is  the  principal  author. 

§  167.     Contents  of  the  Psalms. 

The  contents  of  the  Psalms,  like  those  of  the  prophetical  books, 
are  peculiar  to  those  compositions  ;  other  nations  have  no  similar 
works.     They  celebrate  the  attributes  of  God,  the  Creator  and  Go- 


OF    THE    OLV    TESTAMENT.  439 

vernor  of  all  things,  his  relations  to  this  visitble  universe  and  to  man^ 
with  man's  correspondent  relations  to  God  ;  and  especially  God's 
providence,  his  government  of  the  visible  and  invisible  world,  his  infi- 
nite knowledge,  justice,  and  mercy.  They  recommend  to  men  piety, 
probity,  and  trust  in  God  without  which  all  worship  is  vain.  They 
describe  the  happiness  of  the  good,  for  the  purpose  of  exciting  the 
mind  to  piety  and  virtue,  and  particularly  of  producing  resignation  to 
the  divine  will,  gratitude  toward  God,  and  delight  in  his  beneficence. 
On  the  other  hand  the  misery  of  sinners  is  also  described.  S'cveral 
of  the  Psalms  are  historical  at  least  so  far  as  to  have  been  occasioned 
by  some  historical  event.  In  order  to  understand  such  Psalms  it  is 
necessary  to  ascertain  the  events  to  which  they  relate,  to  draw  them 
from  an  examination  of  the  Psalms  themselves,  and  to  compare  them 
with  the  history  as  derived  from  other  sources.*  This,  it  is  to  be  la- 
mented, is  so  compendious  as  not  to  afford  all  the  assistance  which 
would  be  desirable.  But  we  are  by  no  means  to  expect  historical 
facts  as  the  occasion  of  all  the  Psalms  ;  those  for  which  none  such  can 
be  discovered  amount  to  a  fourth  part  of  the  whole  ntunber. 

It  is  disputed  in  the  present  day,  whether  some  of  the  Psalms  con- 
tain predictions  of  the  Messiah.  There  are  many  who  refuse  to  re- 
cognise any  such,  because  Ps.  ii.,  xvi.,  xxii.,  xl.,  xlv.,  Ixxii.,  Ixxxix., 
and  ex.,  which  are  considered  as  prophetic,  are  susceptible  of  expla- 
nation from  history,  provided  the  poetical  expressions  are  not  too 
strictly  understood.  It  is  impracticable  to  discuss  the  question  in 
this  work,  but  this  much  must  be  said,  that  the  89th  and  1 10th  con- 
tain more  than  can  be  illustrated  by  the  history,  unless  violence  be 
offered  to  the  language.  In  Ps.  ii.,  xvi.,  xxii.,  xl.,  Ixxii.,  perspective 
views  of  the  Messiah  may  be  in  part  presented,  and  in  part  objective 
or  figurative  references  to  him.    Comp.  also  Ps.  lxxxvii.[a] 

The  imprecations  which  are  found  in  the  Psalms  are  not  wishes  for 
self  revenge  ;  self  avengers  are  reckoned  among  the  enemies  of  God, 
that  is,  among  atheists  and  such  as  deny  a  divine  providence.  See 
Ps.  vii.  13.  X.  13,  14.  xUv.  17.  (16),  xciv.  7.  (6),t  and  Comp.  I  Sam. 

*  [See  Eichhorn's  Einleit.  ^  628.  3.  where  some  good  rules  for  a  critical  study  of 
the  Psalms  are  given,  although  some  things  are  to  be  received  with  caution.     Tr.] 

t  [In  the  references  to  the  Psalms,  the  reader  must  bear  in  mind  ^hat  there  is  gene- 
rally a  diflference  of  one  in  the  number  of  the  verses  ;  the  title  of  the  Psalm  being: 
counted  as  a  verse  in  the  Hebrew,  but  not  in  the  English.     TV.] 


440    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

xxiv.,  xxvi.  They  are  prayers  to  God  to  punish  malevolent  enemies, 
that  thus  his  justice  might  be  displayed  on  the  wicked,  and  he  not 
blasphemed  as  iniquitous  or  impotent  ; — to  restrain  bad  men  by  punish- 
ment, and  deliver  good  men  fi-om  being  oppressed  or  dispirited  by  the 
railings  of  wretches.  See  v.  11.  vii.  17,  18.  ix.  5.  x.  13.  xxxv.  10. 
lii.  6—10.  Iviii.  11,  12.  Ixiv.  10,  11.  xciv,  8—16.  cix.  26—28.  It  is 
plain  from  some  places,  that  the  person  who  uttered  the  imprecation 
was  desirous  that  by  the  evils  inflicted  upon  sinijers  they  should  be 
led  to  consideration,  to  acknowledgement  of  God's  justice-  and  to  their 
own  reformation.     See  Ixxxiii.  17 — 19.  lix.   14.  xix.   12.  comp.    Isa. 

xxix.  9.  s. If  these  denunciations  do  occasionally  appear  somewhat 

harsh,  we  must  remember — — 1)  that  they  are  poems,  in  which  a 
vehement  style  is  common 2)  that  they  do  not  contain  any  doc- 
trine, nor  point  out  anything  to  be  done«  but  merely  express  the  feel- 
ing of  the  poet 3)  that  in  the  age  in  which  they  were  written, 

when  the  inequality  of  the  condition  of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked 
after  death  was  unknown,  it  was  necessary  that  the  justice  of  the 
Deity  as  rewarding  and  punishing  in  the  present  life  should  be  the 
more  strongly  inculcated-  that  the  upright  might  be  confirmed  in  their 
righteous  conduct,  and  sinners  be  struck  with  a  salutary  terror  ;  and 
4)  that  the  authors  of  the  Psalms  had  not  yet  been  instructed  in  the 
prayer,  "  forgive  us  our  trespasses,  as  we  forgive  those  who  trespass 
against  us." 

[a)  Even  if  the  writers  of  the  New  TestameDt  had  maintained  silence 
on  this  subject,  which  is  very  far  from  being  the  case,  it  mi:^ht  be  sup- 
posed, that  the  express  declaration  of  our  Lord  himself  in  Luke  xxiv.  44. 
•would  be  sufficient  to  settle  the  question.  There  can  be  no  doubt  with 
any  Christian  who  admits  the  divine  authority  and  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  that  the  Psalms  do  contain  predictions  of  the  Messiah.  It 
seems  to  us  that  the  author  has  expressed  himself  with  unnecessary  cau- 
tion, and  that  the  2d  and  45th,  and  several  other  Psalms,  refer  principally, 
if  not  exclusively,  to  the  Messiah.  Some  writers  have,  no  doubt,  gone 
to  an  extreme  on  this  side  of  the  question,  and  taken  it  for  granted,  that 
any  resemblance,  however  imperfect,  is  sufficient  to  constitute  a  pro- 
phetic reference  to  the  Messiah.  The  more  mystical  expositors  often 
apply  passages  to  Christ  to  the  plain  distortion  of  the  text,  and  in  oppo- 
sition to  all  well  settled  principles  of  interpretation.  But  on  the  other 
hand,  it  has  become  the  fashion  with  certain  modern  critics  to  denv  anv 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMExVT.  441 

reference  to  the  Messiah,  and  to  explain  all  the  passages  which  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament  apply  to  him  as  accommodated.  But 
since  several  of  them  are  quoted  as  predictions  intended  to  illustrate  the 
character  and  actions  of  Christ,  they  cannot  be  explained  on  this  ground 
without  destroying  the  authority  and  inspiration  of  the  New  Testament. 
It  is  certain,  therefore,  that  some  at  least  of  the  psalms  do  refer  originally 
to  the  Messiah.  A  few  of  them  seem  to  relate  to  him  exclusively,  the 
writer's  only  design  appearing  to  be  to  celebrate  the  coming  Saviour  of 
mankind.  Others  refer  to  him,  but  not  to  the  exclusion  of  some  other 
person  or  object  that  may  have  been  in  the  mind  of  the  author,  and  have 
served  as  a  model  whereby  to  illustrate  the  character  and  history  of 
Christ ;  and  occasionally  some  parts  of  a  psalm  are  intended  to  apply  to 
Christ,  and  some  to  another  person,  as  is  the  case  in  the  22d. 

In  Dathe's  preface  to  his  excellent  version  of  the  Psalms,  he  shows  that 
he  is  far  from  being  governed  by  the  loose  and  wild  views  of  some  of  his 
contemporaries  and  countrymen.  He  professes  to  have  been  guided  by 
a  "  love  of  truth,  which  (says  he,  p.  vii.)  my  readers  will  see  in  my 
judgment  respecting  the  prophetic  psalms,  or  those  which  are  called 
psalms  relating  to  the  Messiah.  As  it  was  formerly  the  error  of  our  an- 
cestors to  make  all  psalms  prophetic  of  the  Messiah  which  contained  any 
degree  of  correspondence  ;  so  in  our  own  times  the  opposite  fault  is  sanc- 
tioned by  some,  who  discard  all  predictions  properly  so  called,  and  exclude 
David  from  the  number  of  the  prophets.  I  assent  to  the  opinion  of  those 
who  pursue  a  middle  course,  and  consider  the  number  of  such  psalms  as 
not  very  great,  supposing  that  a  good  cause  is  better  supported  by  a  few 
insuperable  arguments  than  by  many  of  a  doubtful  nature."  Compare 
also  his  introduction  to  Ps.  xxii.     Tr.'] 

§  168.     Titles  of  the  Psalms. 

The  Psalms,  with  the  exception  of  about  33,  have  titles  prefixed 
tolthem.  Some  of  them  (about  86)  indicate  the  author  ;  some  the 
occasion  and  subject  of  the  psalm ;  some  refer  to  the  leader  of  the 
choir,  to  the  musician,  to  the  musical  insti'ument,  or  to  the  air  to 
which  they  were  to  be  sung,  as  nna^n  Sx,  Ivii — lix.  Some  titles  af- 
ford no  information,  as  ^ibm,  a  Psalm^  xcviii.  1 .  mfn^  ^ora,  a  Psalm 

of  praise,  c.  1.,  but  others  comprehend  several  of  the  particulars  just 
enumerated.  These  intimations'are  frequently  of  great  importance, 
and  afford  much  aid  in  interpreting ;  but  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  some 
of  them  are  rather  obscure,  as  S'Sa'D  in  xliv.  1.  xlv.  1.  lii.  1.  liii,  I, 

56 


442    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

liv.  1.  cxlii.  l.[a]  and  y3mh  in  xxxviii.  1.  Lxx.  l.[b] The  author's 

name  is  indicated  by  the  prefix  Lamed,  as  t^DK^,  nnS,  of  Asaph,  of 

David ;  yet  the  same  method  is  used  to  indicate  the  music,  as  n3f  JJsS, 

/o  the  leader  of  the  choir,  and  rrip  'Jab,  to  the  Korahifes,  musicians. 

The  musical  instrument  is  expressed  by  the  particles  V^j  Sn,  or 

by  the  prefix  Beth,  as  n'njn  hv  in  viii.  1,  niS'TJin  Sn  in  v.  1,  niraJS  in 

vi.  1. The  titles  which  merely  designate  the  leader  of  the  band; 

the  musical  instrument,  or  the  purpose  for  which  the  psalm  was  de- 
signed, have  reference  to  the  temple  service,  and  afford  the  interpre- 
ter but  little  light,  [c] 

[a)  See  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  No.  2483,  p.  2323.    Tr.] 

{b)  Michaelis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  No.  623.  pp.  616.  s.     TV.] 

[c)   The  titles  of  the  Psalms  are  ably  illustrated  by  Roseitmueller, 

in  the  Explicatio  dictionum  nonnuUarum  in  Psalmorum  titulis  frequent- 

lus  obviarum,  prefixed  to  his  Scholia  in  Psalmos,  pp.  xxxii — Ixii.     See 

also  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  268.,  and  Horne's  Introd.  IV.  105.  ss.    TV.] 

§  169.     Age  of  the  Titles. 

Oriental  poets  were  accustomed  from  a  very  remote  age  to  prefix 
their  names  to  their  productions.  See  Exod.  xv.  1.  Deut.  xxxi.  30. 
Jud.  v.  1.  II  Sam.  i.  17,  18.  iii.  33,  34.  xxii.  1.;  also  the  extracts 
from  the  Hamasa  in  the  Arabic  Grammar  of  Erpenius,  Schultbns' 
edition,  1767,  or  my  Arabic  Chrestomathy,  p.  185,  189,  198,  CUab 
Ben  Zoheir's  poem,  and  the  Moalldkdh  of  Abiaralkeis,  ed.  Lette, 

1784,  p.  3,  48. It  is  therefore  very  probable,  that  the  proper 

names  which  are  prefixed  to  many  of  the  psalms  are  from  the 
authors  themselves.  But  since  the  greater  part  want  the  authors' 
names,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  they  were  not  added  to  all  the 
psalms,  or  that  some  of  them  were  afterwards  omitted  and  lost. 
Since  also  names  of  authors  occur  which  are  at  variance  with  the 
subject  of  the  psalms  themselves,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  some  must 
have  arisen  in  a  late  age  from  conjecture.  Titles  therefore  which 
exhibit  the  name  of  the  author,  although  they  have  the  sanction  of 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  11."^ 

antiquity,  are  not  on  that  account  to  be  received  as  undoubtedly  cor- 
rect ;  they  must  be  examined  in  order  to  ascertain  whether  they  cor 
respond  with  the  subject  of  the  psalm,  and  if  they  do  not,  must  be 
rejected.     Thus  Ps.  ciii.  bears  the  title  nn"?,  of  David,  although  it 

exhibits  a  dialect  mixed  with  Chaldaisms.  It  is  better  to  confess  that 
the  title  is  false,  than  to  distort  it,  as  some  have  done,  contrary  to  the 
use  of  language,  so  as  to  make  it  mean  that  the  psalm  is  written  in 

David,  that  is,  in  David's  manner. [a] Titles  which  indicate  the 

musical  instruments,  or  the  leader  of  the  music,  or  some  purpose  for 
which  the  psalm  was  composed,  may  indeed  have  come  down  from 
the  age  of  David,  when  the  choir  belonging  to  the  sacred  tabernacle 
and  ark,  and  afterwards  to  the  temple,  was  instituted.  But  certainly 
all  of  them  do  not  belong  to  that  age.  Many  are  more  modern,  as 
is  proved  by  some  unusual  connexions  of  words,  (see  for  instance 
XXX.  1.)  ;  yet  even  these  are  old,  as  is  shown  by  their  being  unintel- 
ligible to  the  Alexandrine  translator. Ancient  interpreters,  espe- 
cially the  Alexandrine  and  Syriac,  have  not  unfrequently  prefixed 
their  own  conjectures,  [ft] 

[a)  See  this  subject  discussed  at  some  length  by  Eichhoriv,  Einleit. 
0  827,  especially  S.  52.  f.     Tr.] 

[b)  See  RosENBi.   Prolegom.  ad   Schol.  c.  iv.,    especially  p.  xxvi. 
xxviii.  ss.     Tr.l 

§  170.  A  Psalm  of  Moses. 
The  90th  Psalm  bears  the  title  HB'dS,  of  Moses ;  and  both  its  con- 
tents and  style,  the  latter  of  which  is  similar  to  that  of  the  poems  of 
Moses  in  Exod.  xv.  and  Deut.  xxxii.,  suit  the  opinion  that  he  was  the 
author.  The  complaint  which  it  contains  of  the  short  duration  and 
many  sorrows  of  human  life  was  very  natural  at  that  period,  during 
the  march  through  Stony  Arabia,  when  man's  age  was  diminished 
from  one  hundred  and  ten  or  one  hundred  and  twenty  years  to  se- 
venty or  eighty,  and  the  Israelites  who  were  upwards  of  twenty  years 

old  when  they  left  Egypt  were  perishing  in  quick  succession. 

The  Jews  ascribe  the  ten  following  psalms  also  to  Moses.    But  they 
do  this  on  the  sround  that  those  psalms  which  have  no  title  are  to  be 


444  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  ROOK 

attributed  to  the  author  whose  name  occurs  in  the  next  preceding 
title ;  a  supposition  totally  unfounded,  and  which  will  not  bear  the 
slightest  examination.     In  xcix.  6.  for  instance,  Samuel  is  mentioned. 

§  171.     Psalms  of  David. 

Seventy-one  psalms  have  the  name  of  David  in  the  titles,  and  the 
Alexandrine  version  adds  eleven  others,  [a]  But  in  some  instances 
the  language  or  subject  is  at  variance  with  the  titles,  as  in  the  103d 
and  139th.  Some  of  the  psalms  attributed  to  David  by  the  version 
just  mentioned,  may  have  been  composed  by  him,  the  96th  for  in- 
stance, as  may  also  sonie  which  have  no  title  naming  the  author,  or 

have  no  title  at  all,  as  the  2d. The  topics  of  David's  songs  are  the 

prosperous  and  the  adverse  circumstances  which  the  author  had  expe- 
rienced. Now  he  complains  of  persecutions  and  calamities,  suppli- 
cates for  deliverance,  and  supports  himself  by  the  hope  of  the  divine 
protection  ;  now  again  he  thanks  Oor>  for  his  rescue,  imploring  his 
defence  in  future.  At  one  time  he  prays  for  victory  over  his  enemies, 
lest  the  Heathen  should  blaspheme  God  as  destitute  of  power ;  at 
another  he  testifies  his  gratitude  for  the  conquests  he  had  gained, 
which  he  ascribes  to  the  divine  assistance.  Now  he  bewails  his  sins, 
particularly  his  adultery  with  Bathsheba  and  the  murder  of  Uriah ; 
then  again  he  forms  pious  resolutions  and  strengthens  himself  in  vir- 
tue, declaring  that  this  alone  constitutes  his  felicity,  and  intreating 

God  to  aid  him  in  the  arduous  path. The  poems  of  David  are  by 

no  means  sublime,  but  they  are  sweet.  For  this  reason  those  are 
particularly  agreeable  which  sing  the  smiling  scenes  of  nature,  as  the 
23d  and  42d  Psalms.  Occasionally  indeed  they  rise  to  a  loftier  cha- 
racter, as  in  the  18th,  but  they  never  equal  the  strains  of  Moses  or 
of  Asaph. 

[a)  The  Psalms  ascribed  to  David  are  seventy-three,  vis,  iii — ix.  xi — 
xxxii.  xxxiv — xli.  li — Ixv.  Ixviii — Ixx.  Ixxxvi.  ci.  ciii.  cviii — ex.  cxxii. 
cxxiv.  cxxxi.  cxxxiii.  cxxxviii — cxlv.  Those  added  by  the  Alexandrine 
version  are  as  follows;  xxxiii.  xlii.  xci.  xciv.  xcv.  xcvi.  xcvii.  xcviii. 
ci.  cr.,  according  to  the  numbering  of  that  version.     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEINT,  446 

§  172.     Psalms  inscribed  to  the  Korahites  and  to  Jeduthun. 

Several  of  the  Psalms  (xlii — xlix,  Ixxxiv,  Ixxxv,  Ixxxvii,  Ixxxvih.) 
are  inscribed  to  the  sons  or  descendants  of  Korah,  not  as  the  authors, 
but  as  musicians  who  performed  them  in  the  temple.  In  the  titles  of 
some  therefore  (xlv,  xlvi,  Ixxxviii.)  the  musical  instruments  to  be 
used  are  also  named,  and  in  one  (Ixxxviii  )  the  name  of  the  author, 
Heman,  is  added. [a]  These  compositions  are  generally  suWime, 
but  they  do  not  breathe  the  sweetness  of  David.  It  is  not  cer- 
tain by  whom  they  were  composed. [6] The  word  Jeduthun,  which 

occurs  in  some  of  the  titles,  is  not  the  name  of  the  author  of  these 
psalms,  but  that  of  a  musical  instrument  so  called  from  the  musician 
of  the  same  name,  who  is  mentioned  in  I  Chron.  xvi.  38,  41.  xxv. 
1,  3.  This  is  evident  from  Ps.  Ixii.  1.  Ixxvii.  1,  compared  with  Ps. 
xxxix.  l.[c] 

[a)  De  Wbtte,  Einleit.  }  269.  anm.  f.)  considers  it  probable  that  the 
ascription  of  these  psalms  to  the  sons  of  Korah  may  be  intended  to  desig- 
nate their  authors.  He  considers  Ps.  Ixxxviii.  1.  as  affording  no  objec- 
tion to  this  view,  as  Heman  the  Esrahite  may  have  been  one  of  the  sons 
of  Korah,  or  the  mention  of  him  in  the  title  may  have  arisen  from  the 
amalgamation  of  contradictory  titles.  Bertholdt,  S.  1774,  and  EiCH- 
HORN,  J  622,  agree  with  Jahn,  whose  opinion  is,  upon  the  whole,  the 
most  probable.     TV.] 

[b)  EicHHORN,  (■  622,  4.)  gives  them  the  highest  character  for  poeti- 
cal worth,  and  says  that  "  they  abound  with  the  loftiest  and  the  most  af- 
fecting passages."     Tr.^ 

[c)  Jahn's  opinion  is  that  of  Jarchi.  But  there  is  no  mention  of  a 
musical  instrument  of  this  name,  and  in  Ps.  xxxix.  1.  the  inscription  is 
]inn"''?  not  jinn"'  Hj^.      For  these  reasons  Rosbnbiueller,  Prol.  ad 

Schol.  p.  xli.  s.  considers  the  word  as  designating  in  Ps.  xxxix.  the  musi- 
cian himself  of  that  name,  and  in  Ps.  Ixii.  Ixxvii,  where  '7^  is  used,  a 

choir  formed  by  him,  and   governed  by  rules  of  his  framing;  comp. 
11  Chron,  xxxv.  15.     This  is  also  the  opinion  of  De  Wette.     TV.] 

§  173.     Psalms  of  Asaph. 

Twelve  of  the  Psalms  (1.  Ixxiii — Ixxxiii.)  are  attributed  to  Asaph, 
a  very  distinguished  Levite.  See  I  Chron.  vi.  24  (39.)  xvi.  5,  7, 
•37.  xxv.  1.     But  the  74th  and  79th  mention  the  destruction  of  .Tern 


14  G  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

salcm  and  the  burning  of  the  temple,  and  are  niore  in  character  witL 
the  Lamentations  of  Jeremiah.  They  cannot  therefore  be  Asaph's. 
But  there  is  not  sufficient  reason  to  deny  him  to  be  the  author  of  the 
77th  and  80th,  as  some  do,  for  these  poems  may  have  been  composed 
in  David's  time,  at  the  commencement  of  the  war  with  the  kings  of 
Zoba  or  Nesibis,  when  the  Hebrews  lost  many  battles  ;[a]  and  this  is 
indeed  quite  probable,  since  the  83d  Psalm  also  mentions  a  combina- 
tion of  the  neighbouring  people  to  destroy  the  Hebrews.  Ps.  Ixxviii. 
does  not  reach  the  sublimity  of  Asaph  ;  ».  69  speaks  of  the  building 
of  the  temple,  and  v.  67,  68,  70,  refer  to  the  division  of  the  kingdom  ; 
events  which  Asaph  can  hardly  be  supposed  to  have  lived  to  see.     It 

is,  no  doubt,  of  the  age  of  Rehoboam  or  Abijah.[6] But  perhaps 

some  of  those  psalms  which  are  without  the  author's  name  were  writ- 
ten by  Asaph,  as  the  91st  and  97th  ;  certainly  Hezekiah's  command 
that  the  Psalms  of  David  and  Asaph  should  be  sung  in  the  temple  in- 
timates that  there  were  more  of  the  latter  than  are  ascribed  to  him. 

This  Psalmist  excels  in  poems  of  an  instructive  kind  ;[c]  he  is 

far  superior  in  sublimity  to  David,  and  does  not  yield  to  Isaiah  and 
Habakkuk.  His  compositions  are  finely  arranged  and  beautifully 
written,  less  sweet  indeed  than  those  of  David,  but  more  vehement. 
No  suspicion  therefore  can  arise  that  these  psalms  were  composed 
by  David  and  were  intended  to  be  performed  by  Asaph. 

[a)  The  author  probably  refers  to  II  Sam.  viii.  3.  ss.  ix.  But  these 
passages  scarcely  contain  sufficient  traces  of  ill  success  to  warrant  the 
strong  expression  used  in  the  text.     TV.] 

[b)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  269  asserts  positively  that  of  all  the  Psalms 
ascribed  to  Asaph,  only  Ps.  I.  is  certainly  his,  Ps.  Ixxiii.  Ixxv.  having 
merely  some  features  which  seem  to  belong  to  him.  Eichhorn,  Ein- 
leit. J  622.  S.  19.  inclines  to  the  same  opinion,  attributing  Ps.  Ixxiii. 
Ixxiv.  Ixxv.  Ixxvii.  Ixxix.  Ixxx.  Ixxxii.  to  the  time  of  the  captivity,  and 
Ps.  Ixxxi.  to  that  of  the  return.  Of  Ps.  Ixxvi.  Ixxviii.  Ixxxiii.  he  thinks 
it  impossible  to  determine  the  date  with  accuracy,  but  considers  it  cer- 
tain that  they  could  not  have  been  composed  by  a  contemporary  of  Da- 
vid, and  probable  that  they  belong  to  the  time  of  the  captivity.  Rosen- 
3I1TELLER,  Prol.  ad.  Schol.  p.  XV.,  is  of  the  same  opinion.     TV.] 

[c)  "  He  was  one  of  those  ancient  wise  men  who  felt  the  insufficiency 
of  external  religious  usages,  and  urged  the  necessity  of  cultivating  virtue 
and  purity  of  mind.  The  50th  psalm  is  a  beautiful  illustration  of  this,*' 
ErcHH.  S.  622.  2.     TV.1 


I 


or    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  441 


§  1 74.     The  PsoHms  of  Heman  and  Ethan. 

The  titles  ascribe  the  88th  Psalm  to  Heman  and  the  89th  to  Ethan, 
both  called  Ezrahites.  In  this  appellative  there  is  some  difficulty, 
(comp.  f  Kings  v.  11.  (iv.  31.)  with  I  Chron.  ii.  6.  vi.  18,  29,  (33, 
44.)  which  however  has  no  connexion  with  the  subject  before  us,  for 
the  contents  of  these  psalms  show  that  they  are  of  a  more  recent  date 
than  the  age  of  the  persons  mentioned  in  the  places  referred  to.  [a] 
In  the  88th  we  hear  the  complaints  of  a  person  of  whose  preservation 
there  was  scarcely  any  hope,  such  as  Hezekiah  in  his  pestilential  dis- 
order (Isa.  xxxviii.),  or  the  leprous  king  Uzziah  might  have  uttered. 
The  89th  appears  hke  an  answer  to  the  complaints  of  the  preceding^ 
speaks  of  David  as  a  person  who  had  long  been  dead,  dwells  upon  the 
great  promise  which  had  been  given  to  David,  and  represents  the 
state  of  things  as  if  its  accomplishment  were  in  great  danger,  as  affiiirs 
really  stood  in  the  time  of  Hezekiah's  sickness.  Some  refer  this 
psalm  to  the  last  periods  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.[6] 

[a)  In  the  Germ.  Introd.  p.  612,  613,  the  author  expresses  his  opinion 
that  most  probably  the  titles  are  incorrect,  but  that  the  two  Levites  who 
are  mentioned  in  I  Chron.  vi.  18,  29.  (33,  44.)  are  undoubtedly  the  per- 
sons intended.     Such  is  also  the  opinion  of  De  Wette.     TV.] 

[6)  Comp.  EiCHB.  Einleit.  ^  622.  S.  23.  f.  Dathe.  Arg.  in  Ps.  Ixxxviii. 
Ixxxix.    TV.] 

§  175.     Psalms  ascribed  to  Solomon. 

The  72d  and  127th  Psalms  are  ascribed  to  Solomon.  But  his 
name  seems  to  have  been  prefixed  to  the  latter,  for  no  other  reason 
than  because  the  first  verse  mentions  the  building  of  a  house, 
which  was  understood  of  the  temple.  Even  the  Alexandrine  version, 
which  is  generally  fuller  in  the  titles  of  the  psalms  than  the  Hebrew 

text,  omits  the  title  of  this  psalm. Ps.  Ixxii.  consists  of  prayers, 

composed  for  the  inauguration  of  Solomon,  who  could  not  have  said 
all  that  is  therein  contained  of  himself. 


448    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  176,     Of  the  anonymous  Psalms. 

The  Hebrew  text  does  not  mention  the  authors  of  the  other  psalms. 
The  Alexandrine  version  names  some,  but  scarcely  ever  such  as 
agree  with  the  contents  of  the  psalms  themselves.  Thus  it  attributes 
the  137th  to  Jeremiah,  whereas  its  author  was  a  returned  exile  ;  the 
146th  and  147th  it  ascribes  to  Haggai  and  Zechariah,  on  the  mere 
conjecture  that  they  were  the  production  of  one  or  other  of  those 
prophets. 

§  177.     Collection  and  division  of  the  Psalms. 

The  division  of  the  Psalter  into  five  books  existed  as  early  as  the 
date  of  the  Alexandrine  version.*  1  his  appears  from  the  fact  that 
that  version  contains  the  doxologies  appended  to  the  first  four  books  ; 
Ps.  xl.  13.  (xli.  14.)  Ixxi.  18,  19.  (Ixxii.  18—20.)  Ixxxviii.  52. 
(Ixxxix.  63.)  cv.  (cvi.)  48.  The  reason  of  this  division  may  be 
gathered  from  the  character  of  the  psalms  contained  in  each  book. 
Almost  all  the  psalms  of  the  first  book  are  the  work  of  David.  In 
the  second  there  are  twenty-two  of  David,  one  of  Asaph,  and  eight 
anonymous  inscribed  to  the  Korahites.  The  third  contains  one,  the 
86th,  ascribed  to  David,  and  this  doubtful  ;  the  remainder  are  partly 
Asaph's,  partly  the  work  of  an  uncertain  author,  and  partly  anony- 
mous. Two  only  in  the  fourth  book  are  ascribed  to  David,  and  one, 
the  90th,  to  Moses,  the  others  being  anonymous.  In  the  fifth,  fifteen 
are  assigned  to  David,  one  is  ascribed  conjecturally  to  Solomon,  and 
the  rest  are  anonymous. These  five  books  of  the  Psalms,  there- 
fore, are  evidently  so  many  different  collections,  following  each  other 
in  the  order  in  which  they  were  made.  The  first  person  who  began 
the  collection  put  together  the  psalms  of  David  ;  the  second,  those 
psalms  of  David  which  it  was  still  in  his  power  to  glean,  admitting  a 
few  others  ;[a]  the  third  had  no  psalms  of  David  in  view,  and  when 
he  wished  to  join  his  own  collection  to  the  former,  he  added  the  note 
at  the  end  of  the  second  book  :  "  the  prayers  of  David  the  son  of 
Jesse  are  ended,"  Ixxii.  20.  The  fourth  collected  anonymous  psalms, 

*  [EiCHHORN  divides  the  Psalms  into  two  parts  and  five  books,  the  first  part  ending 
with  the  72d  P.salm.     ^  623.     TV.  J 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  449 

and  therefore  his  book  exhibits  only  one  of  Moses,  the  90th,  and  two 
of  David,  the  101st  and  103d,  the  latter  of  which  however  is  certainly 
not  his.  The  last  made  a  collection  of  whatever  sacred  poems  he 
could  gather  ;  he  has  therefore  fifteen  of  David,  and  thirty  anonymous. 
This  view  of  the  subject  readily  accounts  for  the  fact,  that  some 
psalms  contained  in  an  earlier  collection  again  occur  in  a  later,  as  the 
14th  and  53d,  the  57th  and  108th. 

It  is  hardly  possible  tty  determine  the  age  of  these  collections. 
All,  or  at  least  the  two  last,  which  contain  Chaldaisms,  were 
made  after  the  return  from  Babylon,  at  the  time  of  the  re-estab- 
lishment of  the  temple  worship.  The  18th  Psalm  occurs  entire 
in  TI  Sam.  xxii. ;  and  therefore  it  may  be  inferred  that  in  the  au- 
thor's age  the  collection  of  Psalms  had  not  been  formed. [6]  It  is 
doubted  on  good  grounds,  whether  smaller  collections  existed  in  Da- 
vid's time,  for  divine  service  at  the  tabernacle  and  afterwards  in  the 
temple.  Such  collections  were  unnecessary,  as  several  copies  of 
single  psalms  would  be  sufiicient  for  the  Levite  singers.  The  com- 
mand of  Hezekiah  to  sing  the  Psalms  of  David  and  Asaph  in  the  tem- 
ple, is  no  proof  of  their  having  been  collected  together  ;  for  they  could 
be  sung  without  any  such  collection  being  made,[c] 

1.  In  the  Alexandrine  and  Vulgate  versions,  the  9th  and  10th  Psalms 
are  connected,  and  therefore  the  subsequent  numbers  are  one  less  than  in 
the  Hebrew,  as  far  as  the  114th,  which  again  is  united  with  the  115th. 
The  116th  is  divided  into  two,  which  still  continues  a  deficiency  of  one  in 
the  following  numbers;  but  the  division  of  the  147th  into  two,  completes 
the  number  150.[rf]  These  remarks  are  founded  on  the  Hebrew  text. 
But  in  seven  manuscripts  the  first  Psalm  is  without  a  number,  being  con- 
sidered as  introductory ;  and  Jerome  declares,  that  the  Hebrews  did  not 
number  it.  Hence  it  is  that  the  second  Psalm  is  called  the  first  in  Acts 
xiii.  33.* 

2.  The  word  or  letters  n7D  which  occurs  so  often,  ure  variously  ex- 
plained by  learned  men.  The  most  probable  bpinion  is,  that  it  denotes 
gome  musical  mark  equivalent,  perhaps,  to  our  da  capo.[e] 

[a)  De  Wette  supposes  this  book  to  be  formed  of  still  smaller  collec- 
tions, perhaps  1st,  Ps.  xlii — 1. ;  2d,  Ps.  li — Ixv.  ;  enlarged  by  subsequent 
additions.  He  thinks  the  same  of  all  the  three  succeeding  books.  Ein- 
leit.  §271.     See  more  in  Bertholdt,  S.  2009.  fi".     Tr.] 

*  [See  the  critical  editions.     Tr.] 

57 


450    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[6)  Jahn  thinks  it  improbable  that  the  author  of  Samuel  would  hav 
introduced  the  Psalm,  if  the  collection  of  which  it  was  a  part  had  existed 
in  his  time.  The  conclusion  does  not  seem  to  be  very  clear  ;  for  the  au- 
thor of  Samuel  may  have  thought  proper  to  add  a  psalm  to  his  work 
from  an  existing  collection,  or  he  may  have  added  it  from  some  common 
source.     Tj:] 

[c)  After  all,  it  is  certainly  very  probable  that  the  use  of  the  Psalms  in 
the  public  service  would  give  rise  to  such  a  collection,  for  which,  per- 
haps, some  private  collections  would  aflford  a  supply.  Eichhorn,  wh-; 
examines  this  subject,  thinks  that  the  first  part  was  not  originally  intended 
for  divine  worship, — that  David  7iiay  have  collected  the  first  book,  but 
not  the  second, — that  there  were  certainly  private  collections  of  David's 
poems  made  in  early  times  by  religious  Hebrews, — and  that  hence  arose 
our  present  Psalter.  He  remarks,  that  in  such  a  collection  some  pieces 
of  David's  would  naturally  be  omitted,  and  that  if  the  collector  afiixed 
David's  name  to  those  Psalms  only,  to  which  he  found  it  aflSxed  in  his 
copy,  or  which  he  certainly  knew  to  belong  to  David,  it  will  be  seen  why 
in  the  first  collection,  which  contains  a  large  part  of  David's  poems,  hi? 
name  is  sometimes  omitted.  Such  a  private  collection  would  becouie 
enriched  in  the  course  of  time  with  other  poems,  either  of  David  or  o*' 
other  authors.     See  $  624,  p.  33—37.     Tr.] 

[d)  The  following  table,  from   De  Wette,  exhibits  at  one  view  th^ 
different  numerations  of  the  Hebrew  and  the  Alexandrine  version. 

Ps.    i — viii.         in  Heb.  are  Ps.   i — viii.         in  LXX. 
"     ix,  X.  "  "     ix.  " 

"     xi — cxiii.  "  "     X — cxii.  " 

"     cxiv,  cxv.         "  "     cxiii.  " 

"     cxvi.  "  "     cxiv,  cxv.  " 

"     cxvii — cxlvi.    "  "     cxvi — cxiv.  " 

"     cxlvii.  "  "     cxlvi,  cxlvii.  " 

"     cxlviii — cl.       "  "     cxlviii — cl.  " 

to  which  is  added         "     cli  "         Tr.] 

[e)  See  Germ.  Introd.  p.  721.  Rosejvm.   Proleg.  ad  Schol.   P.  lix— 
Ixii.     Tr.] 

§  178.     The  Psalms  of  Degrees. 
Fifteen  Psalms  (cxx — cxxxiv.)  have  each  the  title  niSyrDH  '"iit', 

which  is  usually  translated  a  song  of  degrees  but  which  might  be  ren- 
dered a  song  of  goings  up,  that  is  to  say,  of  joarneyings  to  Jerusalem. 
It  can  hardly  indicate  the  return  from  Babylon,  not  to  say  that  the 
1 26th  Psalm  was  composed  some  time  after  that  event.     It  refers  to 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMKNT.  451 

the  customary  journeys  to  Jerusalem  in  order  to  celebrate  the  festi- 
vals ;  for  these  were  not  performed  singly,  but,  in  the  oriental  manner, 
in  companies,  chanting  perhaps  these  songs  by  the  way.  The  ex- 
pression is  very  appropriate  to  these  journeys,  for  the  orientals  are 
fond  of  using  the  phraseology  going  up,  in  reference  to  journeys  to  the 
metropolis,  [a] 

[o)  See  Dissertatio  Chorographica  notiones  superi  et  in/eri,  indeque 
ascensus  et  deceasus  in  chorographiis  sacris  occurrentis  evolvens,  ab  A. 
G.  Baumgarten,  Halce  Masd.  1735.  §  36.  in  Commentationes  Theolo- 
gicae  a  Velthcsen,  Kuinoel  et  Ruperti  editae,  Lips.  1798.  Vol.  V. 
p.  455.  Comp.  also  Jahn's  Archeeoiogy,  Upham's  translation,  5  229.  Tr.] 

§  179.     Whether  there  are  any  Psalms  composed  for  choirs. 

It  is  evident  from  Ps.  xxiv.  cxviii.  asid  cxxxvi.  that  in  some  Psalms 
there  are  two  choirs  that  chant.  But  it  is  not  probable  that  wherever 
the  person  speaking  is  varied,  as  in  Ps.  ii.  xxi.  Ixxxix.  xci.  xcv.  cix. 
cxxi.  cxxvi.  cxxviii.,  the  choirs  were  also  changed  ;  and  much  less., 
that  where  no  change  of  the  person  speaking  is  observable,  different 
choirs  may  still  be  distinguished,  as  Nachtigal  contends,  in  his  book 
entitled  Zion,  1796. 

The  penitential  Psalms  (vi.  xxv.  xxxii.  xxxv.  xxxviii.  li.  and  cxxx.) 
in  the  divine  service,*  are  collected  according  to  their  subject ;  although 
all  of  them  do  not  express  penitence,  but  some  utter  complaints  against 
enemies.  The  alphabetical  Psalms  (xxv.  xxxiv.  xxxvii.  cxi.  cxii.  cxix. 
and  cxlv.)  comprise  a  variety  of  subjects ;  yet  they  deserve  to  be  com- 
pared, for  the  purpose  of  examining  the  Hebrew  method  of  versification. 

*•  fThe  author  alludes  to  the  service  of  the  Romish  church.     Tr.] 


l/)2  1\\RTICULAR     INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 


CHAPTER  11. 


OI'  THE  PROVERBS  OF  SOLOMON. 


§  180.     Proverbs  of  Solomo7i. 
The  book  of  Proverbs  is  entitled  naSty  'bwTi,  where  the  word 

D''^B'D,  as  is  evident  from  the  Arabic.    /^  ,  does  not  mean  proverbs 

in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term,  but  sententious  declarations,  such  as 
the  book  really  contains,  relative  to  virtue  and  vice,  to  the  conduct  of 
domestic  and  public  matters,  to  the  education  of  offspring,  to  the 
government  of  a  state,  to  the  duties  of  children,  parents,  subjects, 
judges,  magistrates  and  kings,  to  good  and  evil,  and  to  happiness  and 
misery.  These  declarations  are.  in  some  respects  similar  to  the 
Golden  Verses  of  Pythagoras,  and  to  the  Proverbs  of  Lockman  and 
Meidan.[a] 

[a]  See  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  §  630,  entitled.  Of  the  universality  of 
Moral  Sentences  among  the  Ancients;  and  Holden's  Preliminary  Dis- 
sertation to  his  Attempt  towards  an  Improved  Translation  of  the  Pro- 
verbs of  Solomon,  8vo.  London,  1819 ;  p.  vi.  ss.     TV.] 

§  181.     Contents  of  the  book  of  Proverbs. 

The  book  consists  of  three  principal  parts. 

I.  The  first  part,  i. — ix.,  is  a  commmendation  of  wisdom.  This 
expression  is  used  to  denote  a  wise  course  of  conduct  founded  on 
correct  views,  and  an  inquiry  afler  such  knowledge  as  leads  to  a  cir- 
cumspect and  virtuous  hfe.  Of  this  the  fear  of  God,  that  is,  true  re- 
ligion, is  made  the  principal  thing,  and  as  it  were  the  basis.     Wicked- 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  453 

jiess  is  then  the  very  contrary.  This  commendation  is  urged  upon 
the  attention  of  the  young,  accompanied  by  those  eternal  truths,  which 
can  never  be  uttered  too  frequently  nor  with  sufficient  earnestness. 

II.  The  second  part,  x. — xxii.  16,  to  which  is  prefixed  the  title  of 
••the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  "  is  complete  in  itself,  and  contains  short 
sententious  declarations  generally  unconnected,  although  sometimes 
a  connexion  with  the  preceding  sentence  may  be  discovered. 

in    The  third  part  comprehends  the  remainder  of  the  book,  and 

conip'ises  six  small  divisions. 1)   The  ^r**  begins  with  another 

commendation  of  wisdom,  and  then  contains  moral  declarations  some- 
what more  at  length,  relating  chiefly  to  rich  men  and  nobles,  xxii. 
17 — xxiv.  22. 2)  The  second  division  is  introduced  by  a  remark- 
able title,  "  these  also  belong  to  the  wise  "  or,  ''  are  from  the  wise," 

and  exhibits   brief  unconnected  sentences,  v.  23 — 34. 3)  The 

third  division,  as  the  title  shows,  contains  the  collection  of  Solomon's 
proverbs,  which  was  made  by  the  learned  under  the  reign  of  Heze- 

kiah    XXV — xxix. 4)   The  fourth  portion  is  composed  of  sayings 

of  an  unknown  person,  Agur  the  son  of  Jakeh.  c.  xxx.  Jerome 
mistook  this  proper  name  for  an  appellative,  and  in  the  Vulgate  trans- 
lated the  expression  thus  without  any  meaning,  ''  verba  congregantis 
filii  vomentis."     The  style  of  this  part  diifois  from  that  of  the  others, 

[a] 6)  the  fifth  part  relates  the  instruction  of  a  queen   to  her 

son,  king  Lemuel.  Both  mother  and  son  are  alike  unknown  and 
it  has  been  conjectured  that  perhaps  they  are  parabolical  persons, 
and  that  Agur  before  mentioned  is  the  author  of  the  piece  xxxi.  1 — 

9. 6)  The  last  contains  a  description  of  a  virtuous  woman,  in 

which  the  initial  letters  of  the  verses  follow  the  order  of  the  alphabet. 
xxxi.  10—31. 

[a)  HoLDEN,  Prel.  Diss,  p,  xvii.  s.  conjectures  that  A*ur  and  Lemuel 
were  both  real  personages,  and  respectively  the  authors  of  the  4th  and 
5th  parts  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs,  in  opposition  to  those  who  suppose 
that  they  are  merely  different  name?  of  Solomon.  For  a  statement  of  va- 
rious opinions  on  this  subject  and  a  refutation  of  them,  see  Holden,  pp. 
xvii. — XXV.     Tr.^ 


454  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOk 

§  182,     Whether  Solomon  is  the  author  of  the  Proverbs. 

These  sententious  sayings,  with  the  exception  of  those  contained  in 
c.  XXX,  xxxi.,  which  the  title  ascribes  to  Agur,  are  attributed  in  i.  1. 
X.  1.  XXV.  1.  to  Solomon,  who  is  said  in  I  Kings,  v  12.  (iv.  32.)  to 
have  composed  3000  proverbs.  That  they  are  the  work  of  one  author 
is  proved,  not  only  by  the  frequent  recurrence  of  some  particular 
words,  as  mp  for  city,  in  viii.  3.  ix.  3,  14    xi.  11.,  and  |D0  mn  for 

the  inmost  parts,  in  xviii.  8.  xx.  27  30.  xxvi.  22  comp.  vii.  27.,  but 
also  by  the  sameness  of  the  style  throughout ;  so  that  the  fact  of  Solo- 
mon's having  been  the  author,  which  is  implied  in  xxii.  20 — 22  and 
expressly  declared  in  xxv.  1.  can  hnrdly  be  considered  as  doubtful. 
So  large  a  number  of  sayings  could  not  indeed  have  proceeded  from  a 
single  author  continuously  and  without  intermission  ;  but  it  involves 
no  difficulty,  to  suppose  as  many,  or  even  more,  to  have  been  uttered 
during  a  considerable  period  of  time   and  at  various  intervals. 

But  no  one  would  maintain  that  the  book  as  we  now  have  it  was 
published  by  Solomon,  for  the  titles  show  that  the  two  last  chapters 
are  not  his,  and  that  the  proverbs  after  xxv.  1.,  were  collected  by 
learned  men  of  Hezekiah's  reign.  Indeed  it  does  not  seem  probable, 
that  Solomon  composed  the  first  24  chapters  in  the  state  in  which  they 
are  at  present.  In  I  Kings,  v.  12.  (iv.  32.)  our  book  of  Proverbs  is 
not  attributed  to  Solomon  ;  it  is  only  said  that  he  spoke  3000  proverbs. 
It  seems,  therefore,  that  on  various  occasions  he  uttered  viva  voce 
these  and  many  other  sayings,  and  that  the  royal  notary  or  chancellor, 
^'^I■3^,  in  discharge  of  his  office,  entered  these  in  the  annals  of  the 

kingdom,  noting  also  the  occasion  on  which  the  king  had  uttered 
any  proverb.  Afterwards,  perhaps  at  the  king's  command,  these 
sayings  were  collected  from  the  annals  by  the  chancellor-  and,  omit- 
ting the  occasion  when  they  were  uttered,  introduced  into  a  separate 
volume,  to  which  the  king  wrote  or  dictated  the  exordium,  i — ix. 
From  this  work,  which  it  was  troublesome  to  transcribe  in  full,  dif- 
ferent persons  wrote  out  such  portions  as  were  particularly  agreeable 
to  them,  so  that  the  complete  work  itself  was  but  seldom  transcribed, 
and  at  length  perished.  A  great  part  of  the  book  therefore  was  lost ; 
and,  upon  the  loss  being  observed,  the  deficiencies  were  as  far  as  pos 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  455 

sible  supplied  from  other  copies  equally  defective.  In  this  way,  we 
have  what  is  contained  in  xxii.  17 — xxix  ,  to  which  the  two  last  chap- 
ters have  been  subsequently  added.  This  hypothesis  accounts  for 
the  facts,  that  several  of  the  proverbs  are  repeated  as  is  the  case  in 
xiv.  31.  and  xvii  5;  xix.  12.  and  xx.  2  ;  xxii.  28.  and  xxiii  10; 
xxii.  13.  and  xxvi.  13;  xix.  24.  and  xxvi.  15;  xix.  13.  and  xxvii. 
15  ;  xxii.  3.  and  xxvii.  12  ;  xx.  16.  and  xxvii  13  ;  that  some  occur 
three  times,  as  in  xiv.  12.  xvi.  25.  and  xxi.  2  ;  and  some  even  five, 
as  in  xvii  1.  xix.  13.  xxi.  9,  19.  xxv.  25.  It  also  explains  why  some 
proverbs  are  repeated  immediately,  as  x.  8,  10.  xix.  5,  9.  xx.  10,  23  : 
for  as  the  king  would  repeat  the  same  saying  often,  and  sometimes 
with  but  a  short  intermission,  as  another  suitable  occasion  arose  the 
chancellor  inserted  in  the  annals  the  saying  and  the  new  occasion 
which  gave  rise  to  it,  but  when  he  made  his  extracts  from  the  annals, 
he  repeated  the  saying,  omitting  the  occasion,  [a] 

[a)  This  account  of  the  compilation  of  the  Book  of  Proverbs  is  cer- 
tainly nothing  more  than  what  it  is  styled  by  the  author,  an  hypothesis, 
of  the  probability  of  which  the  reader  must  form  his  own  opinion.  It  is, 
however,  certain,  that  the  first  three  parts  are  the  production  of  Solomon 
himself,  whatever  may  have  been  the  method  in  which  they  obtained 
their  present  form.  Eichhorn  supposes  that  the  proverbs  of  other  wire 
men  antecedent  to  Solomon  and  contemporary  with  him  are  intermingled 
with  those  of  that  monarch.  Einleit.  \  635  De  Wette,  as  might  be 
expected,  is  of  the  same  opinion.     Einleit.  }  281.     Tr.] 

§   183.     Style  of  the  Proverbs. 

Although  the  language  of  the  book  of  Proverbs  does  contain  some 
words  rather  modern  it  has  none  that  are  foreign.  The  style  is  sim- 
ple, pointed,  and  occasionally  enigmatical  The  persouification  of 
wisdom,  which  often  occurs  in  the  first  part  of  the  book,  is  a  bold 
figure,  but  it  is  well  sustained,  for  the  allegorical  person  always  acts 
and  speaks  agreeably  to  her  elevatea  character.  The  sentences  are 
constructed  in  verse,  and  frequently  some  kind  of  rhyme  may  be  ob- 
served as  in  vii.  13 — 16. 

iS  npBfii  13  np'Tnni  , 


456     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

Comp.  also  xxix.  11. [a] 

[a)  The  similarity  of  termination,  however,  in  these  instances,  may  be 
merely  accidental,  required  by  the  sense  and  parallelism. The  cha- 
racter of  the  style  of  this  book  given  by  Holden,  is  beautiful  and  true. 
"  Though  in  the  charms  of  high-wrought  poetry  it  must  yield  to  several 
parts  of  the  sacred  volume,  yet,  m  judicious  brevity,  in  elegant  concise- 
ness, in  nice  adjustment  of  expressions,  and  in  that  terseness  of  diction, 
which  gives  weight  to  precept,  and  poignancy  to  aphoristic  truth,  it 
stands  pre-eminent,  and  remains  an  illustrious  monument  to  the  glory  of 
its  author."  Prel.  Diss.  p.  xxxviii.  Comp.  also  Lowth,  Prael.  de  Sac. 
Poes.  Heb.  p.  313,  Oxon.  1810,  and  in  Gregory's  Trans,  p.  336.  s.  ^ 

ed.  Boston,  1815.     Tr.] 

§  184.     Use  of  tJie  Proverbs. 

The  Proverbs  are  not  only  of  great  utility  in  enabling  us  to  under- 
stand clearly  the  character  of  Hebrew  poetry  by  means  of  the  paral- 
lel structure  of  their  members,  but  are  also  admirably  adapted  to  give 
instruction  by  the  treasures  of  practical  wisdom  which  their  contents 
open  to  us.  [a]  This  method  of  teaching  by  sententious  sayings  is 
very  ancient,  and  suited  to  the  less  cultivated  classes  of  mankind  in 
every  age,  by  whom  long  treatises  are  not  read  ;  nor,  if  they  were, 
would  they  be  understood  or  remembered.  Brief  sentences  ea?ily 
make  a  deep  impression  on  the  mind,  please  by  their  pointedness.  are 
recalled  as  occasions  present  themselves,  and  thus  afford  a  rule  of 
conduct.  Hence  the  abundant  use  which  is  made  of  these  proverbs 
in  the  New  Testament.  [6]  The  apostles  found  their  moral  instruc- 
tions chiefly  on  this  book,  and  many  places  in  the  epistles  are  scarcely 
intelligible,  unless  they  are  compared  with  the  proverbs  of  Solomon, 
from  which  they  are  drawn.  Julian  the  Apostate,  who  pompously 
expressed  his  contempt  for  our  proverbs,  depreciating  them  far  below 
the  works  of  Phocyhdes,  Theognis,  and  Isocrates,  has  betrayed  in  this 
opinion  his  want  of  judgment.  Cykill.  Alexand.  L.  VII.  cont.  Julian. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEM.  457 

In  the  Talmud,  Baba  Bathra,  c.  i.,  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  are  at- 
tributed to  Hezekiah.  But  this  is  true  only  of  the  collection  in  xxv — 
xxix.  When  in  Massecheth  Shabbath,  c.  ii.  p.  30.,  it  is  disputed  whether 
the  book  of  Proverbs  is  canonical, [c]  this  is  hardly  anything  else  than 
an  examination  of  scruples  which  had  arisen  in  the  minds  of  one  or  two 
Jews ;  for  in  the  age  of  Jesus,  of  the  Apostles,  and  of  Josephus,  the  au- 
thority of  the  book  was  undoubted. 

[a)  See  this  more  fully  represented  by  Holden,  Prelim.  Dissert, 
p.  xl.  ss.     TV.] 

[6)  See  a  list  of  the  quotations  from  this  book  in  the  New  Testament, 
in  Carpzov,  Introd.  P.  II.  p.  184.,  or  in  Holdeh,  p.  xxvii.     TV.] 

fc)  See  HoLDEW,  Prel.  Diss.  p.  xxviii.     TV.] 


S8 


458         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 


CHAPTER  III 


OF   THE    BOOK    OF   JOB. 


■§  185.     Contents  of  the  Book. 

[The  book  of  Job  consists  of  an  introduction,  i.  1 — iii.  l.>  a  dis- 
cussion, iii.  2 — xlii.  6.,  and  a  conclusion,  xlii.  7 — 17. 

In  the  introduction  two  celestial  counsels  are  held,  in  which  one  of 
the  sons  of  God  or  the  appointed  inspectors  of  his  kingdom,  charges 
Job  with  practising  virtue  from  interested  motives.  Hereupon  he 
receives  from  God  full  power  to  put  this  rich  and  pious  man  to  the 
proof,  and  Job  hears  from  one  messenger  after  another  accounts  of 
the  loss  of  all  his  flocks,  servants,  and  children.  The  impoverished  and 
childless  man  nevertheless  still  praises  God.  In  order  to  try  him  fur- 
ther the  accuser  is  permitted  to  afflict  his  body,  only  with  the  condi- 
tion of  sparing  his  life.  Job  is  immediately  attacked  with  a  shock- 
ing disease,  the  scabbed  leprosy.*  but  in  this  hard  trial  he  stiil  re- 
mains unshaken  in  his  piety.  In  this  miserable  condition  he  is  visited 
by  Eliphaz  the  Temanite,  Bildad  the  Shuhite-  and  Zophar  the  Naama- 
thite,  who  bewail  the  lamentable  state  of  their  friend,  and  for  seven 
days  and  nights  remain  in  mournful  silence,  i  ii. 

At  last  Job  breaks  out  in  bitter  complaints,  and  curses  the  day  of 
his  birth,  c.  iii.  Eliphaz  endeavours  to  comfort  him,  and  thus  arises 
a  long  discussioJi  between  Job  and  his  friends  on  the  question, 
whether  afflictions  are  in  all  cases  the  punishment  of  sin,  and  whether 
the  pious  and  virtuous  man  under  the  righteous  divine  government  of 
the  world,  can  languish  in  misery,  without  being  restored  to  happi- 
ness.    Eliphaz  in  his  discourse  had  said  that  sufferings  are  the  pun- 

'  fSep  JTicHAELis,  Suppl.  ad  Lex.  Heb.  roce  pniy  No.  2457.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMCM.  4.J9 

iitiment  of  sin,  and  that  Job  as  a  virtuous  man  could  not  sink  under 
his  affliction,  but  must  again  become  happy,  c.  iv.  v.  Job  rejects 
this  consolation,  sees  nothing  but  death  before  him,  and  denies  that 
his  sins  have  merited  such  sufferings,  c.  vi.  vii.  Bildad  then  presses 
him  more  closely,  maintaining  that  his  children  have  been  swept  away 
as  vicious  persons,  and  that  now  the  punishment  extends  itself  to  the 
too  indulgent  father,  c.  viii.  In  reply,  Job  shows  that  God  destroys 
according  to  his  pleasure  the  virtuous  and  the  vicious,  of  which  truth 
he  is  himself  an  unhappy  illustration,  since  he  suffers  innocently  with- 
out hope  of  restoration,  c.  ix.  x.  Upon  this,  the  third  friend,  Zophar. 
denounces  Job  as  a  bad  man,  whose  crimes  are  not  unknown  to  God, 
and  are  now  punished,  c.  xi.  In  answer  to  this  reproach,  Job  main- 
tains with  feeling-  not  unaccompanied  with  bitterness,  that  the  pros- 
perity of  bad  men  must  be  universally  acknowledged  ;  that  this  was  to 
be  learned  from  the  beasts  and  plants,  and  was  taught  in  ancient 
poems,  and  had  often  been  observed  by  himself ;  he  warns  his  friends 
not  to  defend  the  justice  of  God  so  badly,  lest  he  should  punish  them  : 
he  calls  upon  God  himself  to  make  known  the  crimes  which  he  mus( 
have  committed,  and  then  sinks  back  into  lamentations,  c.  xii — xiv. 

In  the  second  dialogue  Eliphaz  grows  warmer,  and  declares  Job's 
speeches  to  be  vain,  boasting,  presumptuous,  and  even  injurious  to 
virtue.  Job  should  not  regard  the  instructions  of  his  friends  with  so 
much  contempt,  for  he  could  not  be  entirely  pure  fi-om  sin  ;  it  is  a 
truth  confirmed  by  experience  and  the  lessons  of  the  ancients,  that 
the  wicked  are  not  only  in  continual  terror,  but  meet  with  a  terrible 
end,  c.  XV.  To  this  Job  I'e plies,  that  such  are  miserable  consolations, 
that  now  he  hath  no  hope  of  his  innocence  being  acknowledged,  but 
that  it  is  known  to  God  in  heaven  ;  that  nothing  but  death  is  before 
him ;  ending,  as  he  generally  does,  with  distressful  lamentations,  c. 
:  xvi.  xvii.  Bildad  answers,  that  Job's  complaints  would  produce  no 
change,  that  the  sinner  comes  always  to  an  unhappy  end,  which  he 
describes  with  evident  allusion  to  the  wretched  state  of  Job,  c.  xviii. 
Again  Job  asserts  his  innocence,  of  which  he  is  so  completely  con- 
scious, that  his  previous  wish  becomes  a  firm  hope  that  God  will  ap- 
pear and  show  his  opponents  the  truth  :  this  he  ardently  expects,  c. 
xix.  Zophar,  indignant  at  Job's  speech,  repUes  that  the  happiness  of 
the  wicked  i?  never  lasting,  and  in  his  description  of  their  punishments 


460    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

alludes  to  the  affliction  of  Job,  c.  xx.  On  the  other  hand  Job  con- 
tinues to  affirm  that  sinners  are  happy  ;  that  their  joys  are  not  lasting 
is  contrary  to  experience  :  the  infeUcity  of  their  children  is  not  feh  by 
the  deceased  parents  :  in  short,  happiness  and  misery  are  distributed 
by  God  according  to  his  good  pleasure,  c.  xxi. 

Eliphaz  now  in  the  third  dialogue,  becomes  completely  exasperated, 
and,  like  Bildad  and  Zophar,  denounces  Job  as  a  great  sinner,  whom 
nothing  but  deep  repentance  can  deliver.  He  recounts  the  crimes  of 
Job  as  if  he  had  seen  them  all  with  his  own  eyes.  He  charges  him 
with  having  maintained,  that  the  conduct  of  man  is  a  matter  of  indif- 
ference with  God  ;  which  Job  had  not  said,  c.  xxii.  Job  repeats  his 
wish  to  appear  before  God,  and  his  hope  that  his  innocence  should  be 
attested,  but  complains  that  he  cannot  meet  with  him.  He  continues 
to  support  his  opinion  respecting  the  happy  state  of  bad  men  by  ex- 
perience, c.  xxiii.  xxiv.  Bildad  is  unable  to  contradict  this,  and 
therefore  merely  declares,  that  all  complaints  against  God's  omnipo- 
tence are  vain,  and  that  no  one  is  pure  in  his  presence  c.  xxv.  This. 
Job  says,  was  very  well  known  to  him,  and  describes  the  grandeur 
and  holiness  of  the  Deity  better  than  Bildad  had  done,  c  xxvi.  In 
this  third  dialogue  Zophar  has  nothing  to  answer,  and  is  silent. 

Since  now  no  one  has  anything  further  to  reply  to  Job's  arguments, 
he  proceeds  triumphantly,  and  defends  his  innocence,  and  his  doc- 
trine of  the  divine  distribution  of  happiness  and  misery.  Were  he 
conscious  of  evil,  he  would  not  have  appealed  to  the  judgment  of  his 
Maker.  But  although  God  does  distribute  happiness  and  misery  ac- 
cording to  his  own  pleasure,  yet  he  has  always  reasons,  which  man, 
although  he  has  discovered  much,  and  has  spied  out  even  the  gold  in 
the  bowels  of  the  earth,  is  incompetent  to  explore,  c.  xxvii.  xxvii; 
He  then  depicts  his  former  condition-  and  his  pious  and  virtue !. 
conduct,  contrasting  with  it  his  present  state  of  Wretchedness,  in  or- 
der to  show  that  his  losses  are  not  attributable  to  any  criminal  course 
'  of  conduct.  He  expresses  at  last  another  wish  to  be  able  to  vindi- 
cate himself  before  God,  c.  xxix — xxxi. 

Now  the  subject  is  taken  up  by  Elihu  the  Busite,  a  son  of  Barachel 
of  the  family  of  Ram.  This  young  man,  who  is  not  mentioned  among 
the  friends  of  Job,  and  yet  must  have  been  with  him,  since  he  had 
heard  all  that  had  passed,  had  observed  that  both  parties  had  gone  too 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  461 

far,  the  friends  in  charging  Job  with  crimes,  and  he  in  maintaining  his 
innocence.  He  agrees  with  his  predecessors  that  misery  is  the  pu- 
nishment of  sin,  and  that  the  innocent  man  cannot  remain  irrecoverably 
unhappy  ;  only  he  supposes  that  .loh  may  have  committed  sins  uncon-  , 
sciously,  and  have  been  somewhat  overbearing  in  his  prosperity. 
Now  it  is  the  divine  intention  to  humble  him,  and  after  salutary  ad- 
monitions to  restore  him  to  a  happy  condition. This  is  in  fact  no- 
thing more  than  had  been  already  advanced,  which  Elihu  repeats  in 
different  words  :  Job  had  sinned,  is  now  punished,  and  if  he  repents 
will  be  again  blessed  with  prosperity.  No  one  therefore  thinks  this 
man  of  words  worthy  of  an  answer,  and  this  he  regards  as  an  evidence 
of  decided  superiority,  and  speaks  on  that  account  with  the  greater 
confidence.  When  at  last  thunder  is  heard  at  a  distance  he  de- 
scribes the  power  of  Vjod  which  is  displayed  in  this  occurrence,  c. 
xxxii — xxxvii. 

Suddenly  God  himself  appears  in  the  thunder  cloud,  which  at  first 
Job  had  merely  wished,  afterwards  had  hoped,  and  at  last  had  again 
wished,  but  which  his  friends  had  constantly  represented  as  something 
which  was  not  to  be  expected  God  proposes  to  Job  questions  on 
the  creation  and  organization  of  the  physical  world  and  of  the  animal 
kingdom,  to  answer  which  it  would  have  been  necessary  for  Job  to 
have  taken  part  in  the  creation,  and  to  have  surveyed  the  whole  plan, 
together  with  the  causes  and  designs.  Job  acknowledges  his  igno- 
rance, and  learns  from  hence  that  it  is  bold  and  presumptuous  for  hu- 
man powers  to  attempt  to  comprehend  God's  government  of  man,  c. 
xxxviii — xlii.  6. 

In  the  conclusion,  God  declares  that  the  three  friends  had  not 
spoken  so  justly  of  him  as  Job  himself  had  done  ;  that  they  should  be 
forgiven  on  condition  of  presenting  a  burnt  offering,  and  t!iat  Job 
should  intercede  for  them.  Job  himself  is  restored  to  health,  his 
wealth  is  doubled,  he  becomes  the  father  of  seven  sons  and  three 
beautiful  daughters,  and  his  life  is  prolonged  140  years,  xlii.  7 — 17, 

§  186.     Arrangement  and  Style. 

The  arrangement  and  style  of  this  book  exhibit  much  ingenuity. 

7'he  introduction  explains  to  the  reader  the  state  of  the  question 

which  is  the  subject  of  the  subsequent  discussion.     This  is  done  by 


462    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

representing  two  councils  'so  to  speak)  of  the  Deity,  held  in  heaven. 

In  these  all  the  circumstances  are  apt  and  well  arranged. God  if; 

introduced  as  the  benignant  ruler  and  just  judge  of  the  universe. 
Among  his  sons  or  ministers  who  stand  in  his  presence,  is  one,  more 
acute  than  the  rest  who  vaunts  of  being  able  to  discover  whatever 
latent  evil  any  where  exists,  and  is  continually  preferring  accusations 
before  the  divine  judge,  on  which  account  he  has  acquired  the  name 
of  Satan,  jDi'TI,  the  accuser.     He  speaks  in  perfect  consistency  with 

his  character.  When,  on  his  representation  this  integrity  of  Job  is 
put  to  the  proof,  the  calamities  of  that  just  man  follow  each  other  in 
rapid  succession,  so  that  his  spirits  are  broken  as  it  were  by  con- 
stantly repeated  strokes.  The  black  leprosy,  an  execrable  disease, 
which  was  considered  as  a  punishment  inflicted  by  the  especial  direc- 
tion of  the  Deitv  is  selected  as  best  adapted  to  excite  the  contro- 
versy ;  and  Job,  although  reduced  to  a  most  wretched  condition,  is 
still  possessed  of  his  reason,  that  he  may  dispute  with  his  friends  on 
the  cause  of  his  misery. 

The  introduction  and  conclusion,  are' written  in  prose,  but  the  ti!?'^- 
.cussion  and  the  speech  of  the  Deity  are  composed  in  a  high  strain  of 
poetry,  to  which  there  is  nothing  comparable  in  the  other  Hebrew 
books,  unless  it  be  the  poems  of  Moses,  Exod.  xv.  Deut.  xxxii. 
Ps.  xc.  Yet  all  the  interlocutors  do  not  speak  in  the  same  style. 
The  discourses  of  Job  are  superior  to  the  others  ;  his  friends  have 
each  his  respective  language  ;  the  revelations  and  poetry  of  remoter 
ages  which  are  introduced,  are  conceived  in  a  sublimer  style,  iv. 
17 — 21.  viii.  11 — 19.  xii.  13—25.  xv.  20—35  ;  and  the  discourses  of 
God  very  far  excel  all  the  other  parts  of  the  book.  In  those  of  Elihu 
some  affectation  is  observable,  which  shows  the  talent  of  the  writer  j 
for  this  speaker  ought  to  make  his  appearance,  like  a  young  sciolist, 
with  an  artificial  modesty  and  high  opinion  of  his  own  knowledge. 
Notices  of  various  subjects  are  also  introduced  in  this  small  work  with 
remarkable  ingenuity.  They  relate  princii)ally  to  God,  to  religion, 
to  morals  and  to  natural  history-  especially  that  of  certain  animals,  as 
the  war  horse,  the  hippopotamus  and  the  crocodile,  xxxix.  19.  xli. 
26.  (34  )  See  also  the  passages  relating  to  mines,  xxviii..  and  to  the 
stars,  ix.  7 — 9.  xxvi.  13.  xxxvii.  9.  xxxviii.  31.  32. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  463 

The  character  of  each  person  is  well  sustained  through  the  whole 
book.  Job,  every  where  consistent,  pious,  conscious  of  his  own  up- 
riglitness,  but  depressed  by  misery,  weighed  down  by  disease,  and 
irritated  by  the  clamorous  accusations  of  his  friends,  is  hurried  on  to 
make  some  rash  assertions.  Confident  in  bis  own  innocence, 
his  appeals  to  God  are  sometimes  too  bold,  and  his  attacks 
upon  his  friends  too  harsh,  but  he  always  ends  in  complaints, 
and  excuses  his  vehemence  on  account  of  the  magnitude  of  his  cala- 
mity. His  friends,  all  sincere  worshippers  of  the  true  GO0,  and 
earnest  advocates  of  virtue,  agree  in  the  opinion  that  divine  justice 
invariably  punishes  the  wicked,  and  rewards  the  good  with  present 
happiness.  They  endeavour  to  prove  this,  by  appeals  to  more  an- 
cient revelations,  to  the  opinions  of  those  who  had  lived  in  former 
times,  and  to  experience,  apprehensive  lest  the  contrary  assertion  of 
Job  should  injure  morals  and   religion.     They  all  speak  of  angels. 

Nevertheless  they  differ  from  each  other  in  many  other  matters. 

Eliphaz  is  superior  to  the  others  in  discernment  and  in  delicacy.  He 
begins  by  addressing  Job  mildly,  a^d  it  is  not  until  irritated  by  con- 
tradiction that  he  reckons  him  among  the  wicked. Bildad,  less 

discerning  and  less  polished,  breaks  out  at  first  in  accusations  against 
Job,  and  increases  in  vehemence  :  in  the  end   however,  he  is  reduced 

to  a  mere  repetition  of  his  former  arguments. Zophar  is  inferior 

to  his  companions  in  both  these  respects.  At  first  his  discourse  is 
characterized  by  rusticity  ;   his  second  address  adds  but  little  to  the 

first,  and  in  the  third  dialogue  he  has  no  reply  to  make. Elihu 

manifests  a  degree  of  veneration  for  Job  and  his  friends,  but  speaks 
like  an  inflated  youth,  wishing  to  conceal  his  self-sufficiency  under 

the  appearance  of  modesty. Gon  is  introduced  in  all  his  majesty, 

speaking  from  a  tempestuous  cloud,  in  the  style  of  one  with 
whose  honour  it  is  not  consistent  to  render  an  account  of  his  govern- 
ment, and  to  settle  the  agitated  question,  which  is  above  the  reach  of 

human  intellect.     He  therefore  merely  silences  the  disputants. > 

The  feelings  of  the  interlocutors,  as  is  natural,  become  warm  in  the 
progress  of  the  controversy,  and  each  speaker  returns  to  the  stage 
with  an  increased  degree  of  eagerness  and  impetuosity,  [a] 


464      Particular  introduction  to  each  book 

fa)  For  an  eloquent  review  of  the  character  of  each  speaker  in  the 
book  of  Job,  see  Eichhorn's  Einleit.  J  640,  S.  143—148.  "  All  that  I 
can  say,"  observes  this  elegant  writer,  "  respecting  the  beauties  of  this 
book,  is  much  too  weak  ;  they  must  be  felt  and  enjoyed,  not  spoken  of.'* 
He  then  proceeds  to  illustrate  the  characters  in  the  poem,  S.  148 — 
151.    Tr.] 

§  ^87.     Opinions  respecting  the  Contents  of  the  Book. 

The  ancients  in  general,  considered  the  book  of  Job  as  containing 
a  true  history,  while  most  modern  critics  regard  it  as  a  parabohcal 
fiction.*  Others,  attempting  a  middle  course,  allow  that  the  princi- 
pal points  of  the  narrative  are  real  history,  but  maintain  that  the  ar- 
rangement and  style  are  intended  for  poetical  effect.  The  observa- 
tion of  Bernard  Lamv,  priest  of  the  Oratory,  in  his  Apparatus  Bib- 
lieus,  1723  p.  336,  is  worthy  of  being  mentioned:  '<  It  is  to  be  re- 
marked in  general,  that  the  book  of  Job  is  useful,  even  if  Job  himself 
never  existed  ;  as  the  Jews  say  in  the  Talmud,  (Baba  Bathra  I.  p. 

15.)  that  Job  was  never  created,  and  that  his  book  is  a  parable." 

I  shall  state  the  grounds  of  the  different  opinions,  leaving  it  to  the 
reader  to  form  his  own  judgment. 

§  188.     Job  not  a  history  but  a  parable. 

In  opposition  to  the  historical  truth  of  the  account  the  following 

arguments   are    advanced. 1)      The    consultations    of  God  in 

heaven  with  his  sons  or  attendant  angels,  the  introduction  of  so 
extraordinary  an  accuser,  and  the  power  ascribed  to  him  of  doing 
various  things  on  earth,  do  not  seem  Uke  reality ;  and  no  trace  of 
vision  is  any  where  to  be  seen.  If  now  the  prologue,  which  exhibits 
a  solution  of  the  question  discussed  in  the  work,  be  fictitious,  the  dis- 
cussion itself  cannot  be  a  historical  event. 2)  The  arrangement 

and  style  show  too  much  art  to  be  consistent  with  a  historical  trans- 
action ;  the  sick  man  and  his  condoUng  friends  could  not  have  poured 
forth  at  the  instant  such  sublime  strains.  And  if  all  the  discourses 
were  uttered  as  they  were  related,  they  must  have  been  taken  by  an 

*    [The  author,  it  is  presumed,  refers  more  particularly  to  those  of  his  own  coun- 
try.    TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  4(55 

'Xpert  writei",  which  is  neither  probable  nor  consistent  with  the  com- 
plaint of  Job  in  xix.  23,  24. 3)  It  is  incredible  that  God  should 

have  spoken  from  a  cloud  almost  half  an  hour,  with  no  other  end  than 

to  quiet   four  disputants. -These  are  the  principal  arguments  on 

the  one  side.  But  they  prove  no  more  than  this,  that  the  whole  of 
the  narrative  is  not  history  ;  there  may  still  be  a  real  history  as  the 
ground  work,  ornamented  in  this  way  by  the  poet.  Other  alleged 
proofs  are  of  less  consequence,  such  as  the  frequent  round  mimbers, 
the  omission  of  JoVs  genealogy,  also  of  the  names  of  his  sons,  while 
those  of  his  daughters  are  mentioned,  the  omitting  to  state  whether 
Job's  children  after  his  recovery  were  by  the  same  or  a  second  wife ; 
the  length  of  his  age,  which  must  have  extended  to  200  years  ;  and 

lastly,  the  nam£.  itself,  3rN,*  in  Arabic  i  A     i    re^entino, 

returning  to  God,  praising  God,  which  is  thought  to  be  fictitious  and 
adapted  to  the  narrative,  [a] 

[a)  See  Magee  on  the  Atonement,  note  LIX.  Vol.  II.  p.  48 — 56.  ed. 
Loud.  1816.  The  opinion  advocated  in  this  section  is  that  of  Maimoni- 
DES,  Moreh  Nevochim,  P.  III.  c.  xxii.  p.  395.  ss.;  of  Le  Clerc,  Sentimens 
de  quelques  Theologiens,  p.  274.  ss.,  although  he  expresses  it  with  hesi- 
tation, and  in  his  Commentary  on  Job  is  entirely  undecided,  "  rem  in 
mendio  relinquens,''  says  the  friend  who  published  it,  in  his  preface  ; 
of  Semler,  App.  ad  Int.  V.  et  N.  T.  p.  171.  s. ;  of  Michaelis,  Einl. 
in  die  Gottl.  Schr.  d.  A.  B.  S.  1.  ff.,  and  Epimetron  in  Lowthii  Prael. 
de  Foes.  Heb.  Vol.  I.  p.  171— 182,  ed.  Oxon.  1763;  and  of  a  multitude  of 
subsequent  German  writers.     TV.] 

§  189.     Job  a  true  history. 

Those  who  consider  the  book  of  Job  as  historical,  allege 1) 

that  'in  Ezek.  xiv.  14,  16,  20,  Job  is  introduced  as  a  real  person 
along  with  Noah  and  Daniel.'  But  certainly  fictitious  personages 
may  be  brought  upon  the  stage  along  with  real ;  and  this  is  evident 
from  Luke  xvi.  19.  ss.  where  Abraham  is  introduced  in  company  with 

the  fictitious  characters  Lazarus  and  the  rich  man.  [a] 2)  The 

Apostle  James  speaks  of  the  patience  of  Job,  and  of  the  end  with 

*  [See  RosENM.  Prokg.  adSchol.  in  Jol-.,  §  3.  not.  1.)     TV] 
59 


466  PARTICLLAR  INTRODUCTION   TO  EACH  BOOK 

which  God  crowned  his  calamities,  v.  1 1  ;  and  hence  it  is  argued, 
that  he  considered  the  book  of  Job  as  a  true  history.  But  others 
maintain  that  the  Apostle  means  nothing  more  than  that  Christians 
}iad  heard  the  book  of  Job  read  in  the  church  ;  not  at  all  that  the  book 
contains  a  real  history  ;  for  even  the  parables  which  occur  in  scrip- 
ture, and  the  characters  introduced  in  them,  although  avowedly  ficti- 
tious, are  used  as  examples.  If  a  preacher  were  to  speak  of  the  un- 
bounded benevolence  of  the  good  Samaritan,  and  of  what  Jesus  has 
said  of  him,  it  would  not  follow  that  he  considered  the  Samaritan  as  a 
real  person,  and  the  parable  in  Luke  x.  30 — 37,  as  a  true  history. 

3)  In  the  book  of  Tobit,  ii   12,  it  is  said  that  "  when  he  was  an 

old  man  he  was  tried  with  blindness,  that,  like  Job,  he  might  give  pos- 
terity an  example  of  patience,"  and  in  v.  15,  "  that  as  Job  was  for- 
merly insulted  by  kings,  so  was  Tobias  by  his  connexions."  But  it 
is  replied,  that  these  passages  do  not  occur  either  in  the  Greek  text 
or  in  the  Syriac  or  Arabic  versions,  and  that  they  are  additions  of  the 
Jew  by  whose  dictation  Jerome  translated  the  Chaldee  text  of  Tobit 
into  Latin.     Besides,  it  is  also  questioned,  whether  the  book  of  Tobit 

itself  be  a  true  history. 4)  It  was  the  general  opinion  of  the 

fathers,  that  the  book  of  Job  is  the  narrative  of  a  real  transaction. 
To  this  it  is  said  on  the  other  hand  that  no  father  of  the  church  had 
written  on  Job  until  the  end  of  the  6th  century,  when  Gregory  first 
published  his  commentary  on  this  book  in  which  he  confined  himself  to 
its  moral  sense,  and  therefore  to  boast  of  the  consent  of  fathers  is  alto- 
gether idle  ;  and  moreover,  if  it  could  be  shown,  nothing  could  be  in- 
ferred from  it,  because  the  decision  of  the  Council  of  Trent  (Sess.  IV.) 
only  prohibits  exposition  of  Scripture  against  the  unanimous  consent 
of  fathers  in  relatio7i  to  faith  and  practice,  on  neither  of  which  has  the 

question  under  discussion  any  bearing. 5)  It  is  urged  also  that  the 

Orientals  point  out  the  sepulchre  of  Job.  If  any  thing  can  be  infer- 
red from  this  circumstance,  it  is  simply  the  fact,  that  some  person  of 
this  name  has  formerly  lived  ;  not  that  our  book  of  Job  contains  a 
real  history.  Besides,  no  credit  is  to  be  given  to  these  representa- 
tions of  eastern  people  ;  for  they  show  not  one,  but  six  sepulchres  of 

Job,  widely  distant  from  each  other. -6)  Lastly,  the  subscription 

of  the  Peshito  version  is  appealed  to,  which  was  known  to  Origen, 
and  which  speaks  of  Job  as  a  king  of  the  Edomites.     To  this  it  i« 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAME^ 1.  IbT 

replied,  that  if  the  subscription  were  even  more  ancient  than  the  time 
of  Christ,  it  would  still  be  too  modern  to  prove  any  thing  in  relation 
to  a  fact  of  such  high  antiquity ;  and  that  it  is  a  mere  conjecture 
founded  on  the  trifling  similitude  of  the  name  of  Job  with  that  of  Jo- 
bab,  a  king  of  the  Edomites. 

[a)  There  is,  however,  an  evident  difference  between  a  parable, 
expressly  purporting  to  be  fictitious,  and  a  solemn  rebuke  or  warning  to 
a  whole  nation.  Besides,  in  Luke  the  circumstances  predicated  of  aW  the 
characters  are  fictitious ;  in  Ezekiel,  they  are  unquestionably  true  with 
relation  to  Noah  and  Daniel,  and  might  reasonably  be  expected  to  be 
so  in  the  other  instance  associated  with  these  two.     TV.] 

§  1 90.     Whether  the  hook  of  Job  is  founded  on  real  history. 

Such  are  the  arguments  which  are  adduced  on  both  sides  of  this 
question.  They  neither  disprove  the  existence  of  some  wealthy  and 
pious  man,  agitated  and  distressed  by  severe  reverses  of  fortune,  nor 
do  they  confirm  the  truth  of  every  part  of  the  narrative.  Hence  the 
opinion  has  arisen,  that  the  principal  parts  are  founded  in  truth,  and 
that  the  others  are  added  by  the  writer  for  the  sake  of  embellishment. 
This  is  maintained  by  Huet,  Demonstratio  Evangelica,  Prop.  IV.  §  2. 
p.  241,  Bernard  Lamy,  Apparatus  Biblicus,  p.  336,  and  Dupin, 
Prolegomenes  sur  la  Bible,  P.  I.  L.  I.  ch.  3.  §  10.  p.  93 — 95,  [on 
the  Canon,  p.  98.  ss.]  and  by  other  learned  Catholic  divines.  They  do 
not  indeed  adduce  arguments  sufficient  to  prove  the  truth  of  the 
chief  pomts  in  the  account,  except  this  one,  that  poets  are  accustomed 
to  select  their  subjects  from  history,[a]  which  they  suppose  the  author 
of  the  book  of  Job  to  have  done.  [6] 

[ffl)  EiCHHORN  illustrates  this  observation  by  referring  to  the  poems 
of  Homer.     Einleit.  J  638,  639.     TV.] 

\bi)  Upon  the  whole  it  seems  to  be  most  probable,  that  Job  and  his 
friends  were  i-eal  persons ;  that  the  prominent  circumstances  related  in 
the  book  were  matters  of  fact,  which,  in  order  to  produce  the  most 
effect,  the  poet  embellishes ;  that  so  much  of  the  introduction  as  relates 
to  Satan's  appearance  before  God  and  the  consultations  in  heaven  resulting 
in  permission  to  put  Job's  piety  to  the  test,  is  allegorical,  intended  to  in- 
troduce the  more  graphically  the  causes  and  origin  of  his  trials,  and  to 
afford  a  solution  of  the  question  discussed  in  the  poem  ;  and  that  God's 
speaking  out  of  the  whirlwind  is  a  strong  and  sublime  effort  of  the  author'? 


468    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

splendid  imagination,  by  which  he  terminates  the  controversy  in  the  most 
masterly  manner. 

Such  is  the  opinion  of  Lowth,  which  is  of  the  highest  authority  in  a 
question  of  this  nature.  He  says :  "  The  truth  of  this  narrative  would 
never,  I  am  persuaded,  have  been  called  in  question,  but  from  the  im- 
moderate affection  of  some  allegorizing  mystics  for  their  own  fictions, 
which  run  to  such  excess,  as  to  prevent  them  from  acceding  to  anything 
but  what  was  visionary  and  typical.  When  I  speak  of  the  poem  as 
founded  in  fact,  1  would  be  understood  no  further  than  concerns  the  ge- 
neral subject  of  the  narrative,  for  I  apprehend  all  the  dialogue,  and 
most  likely  some  other  parts,  have  partaken  largely  of  the  embellish- 
ments of  poetry ;  but  I  cannot  allow  that  this  has  by  any  means  extended 
so  far  as  to  convert  the  whole  into  an  allegory."  Lectures  on  Hebrew 
Poetry,  Lect.  xxxii.  Gregory's  Trans,  p.  452.  ed.  Boston,  1815. 
RosENMCELLER,  Prol.  ad  Schol.  p.  8.;  Doederlein,  as  there  quoted; 
Pareatj,  Inst.  Interp.  Vet.  Test.  p.  551.;  and  Magee  on  Atonement, 
Note  LI.  p.  54,  56.,  accede  to  this  opinion.     TV.] 

§  191.     Design  of  the  Author  of  the  Book  of  Job. 

Whatever  may  be  thought  of  the  contents  of  the  book,  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  author  to  inculcate  this  lesson  ;  '  that  the  reasons  on 
account  of  which  good  men  are  often  obhged  to  contend  with  adver- 
sity, and  bad  men  enjoy  prosperity,  even  to  the  end  of  hfe  are  in- 
scrutable, and  therefore  that  tlie  one  is  no  evidence  of  wickedness 
nor  the  other  of  goodness  ;  that  God  does  not  always  determine  the 
lot  of  mortals  according  to  their  virtue  or  vice,  but  is  frequently  go- 
verned by  other  motives  of  the  most  equitable  kind,  which  it  is  im- 
possible for  man  to  comprehend.'  This  is  illustrated  by  the  example 
of  Job,  who  was  afflicted  with  so  many  evils  in  order  that  the  since- 
lity  of  his  virtue  might  be  the  more  conspicuous  ;  a  design  which 
was  not  perceived  by  any  of  his  friends.  The  sentiment  of  Job,  who 
is  declared  by  the  Deitv  to  have  spoken  more  correctly  than  the 
others,  was  the  sentiment  of  the  author,  that  good  men  might  be 
afflicted  even  to  the  end  of  life,  and  that,  for  inscrutable  but  still 
equitable  causes,  God  had  so  determined.  It  is  therefore  evident 
that  the  author  was  on  the  point  of  perceiving  the  doctrine  of  future 
rewards  and  punishments  ;  but  his  view  did  not  penetrate  quite  so 
far,  as  neither  did  the  authors  of  psalms  xxxvii.  xxxix.  and  Ixxii., 
who  discuss  the  same  subject. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  469 

1.  The  celebrated  text  in  xix.  23 — 27,  cannot  be  explained,  according 
to  the  usage  of  language  and  the  intention  of  the  author,  in  reference  to 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead  ;  but  it  expresses  JobV  wish  and  hope  that 
God  would  bear  testimony  to  his  innocence  in  the  present  life.  In  this 
respect  indeed  Job  is  at  variance  with  himself,  because  he  says  else- 
where, that  nothing  but  death  awaits  him  ;  but  such  inconsistency  is 
altogether  in  character  with  the  state  of  a  sick  man  complaining  of 
his  distresses. [a] 

2.  Some  contend,  that  it  was  tne  intpntion  of  the  author  to  illustrate 
the  sentiment  advanced  by  Elihu,  that  God  ?ends  calamities  upon  good 
men  who  have  suffered  themselves  to  be  somewhat  arrogant  in  prospe- 
rity, in  order  that  they  may  be  admonished  thereby  and  return  to  rt  pro- 
per course  of  life,  and  afterwards  retrain  their  prosperous  condition.  But 
God,  in  his  discourse,  makes  no  mention  of  EHhii,  but  testifies  that  Job 
had  spoken  more  conformably  to  truth  than  the  others  ;  and  if  the  au- 
thor had  designe  '  to  convey  his  own  opinion  in  the  language  of  Elihu, 
he  would  have  introduced  this  man  as  a  person  of  years  and  gravity,  and 
not  as  an  inflated  youth  with  an  affectation  of  modesty.  Besides,  this 
opinion  is  inconsistent  with  the  introduction,  from  which  it  appears  that 
the  design  of  Job's  calamities  was  to  prove  the  sincerity  of  his  virtue. 

[a)  Whatever  may  be  the  true  meaning  of  this  passage,  which  com- 
mentators of  high  authority  have  so  variously  interpreted,  the  author  has 
certainly  expressed  himself  with  too  much  positiveness.  It  is  indeed 
very  possible  that  Job  intended  nothing  more  than  to  assert  his  confidence 
that  God  would  interpose  to  rescue  him  from  the  accusations  of  his  ca- 
lumniators, and  by  some  visible  manifestation  vindicate  the  character  of 
his  servant.  This  view  of  the  test  would  coincide  with  the  manner  in 
which  the  poem  terminates,  when  God  appears  and  free?  Job  from  the 
charges  which  had  been  brought  against  him.  But  that  Job  referred  to 
the  resurrection  of  his  own  body,  distressed  and  excoriated  by  the  loath- 
some disease  under  which  he  was  labouring,  and  to  the  Almightt's  vin- 
dicating the  claims  which  he  had  constantly  made  to  uprightness  and  in- 
tegrity of  character  by  a  public  recognition  of  his  innocence  at  some  fu- 
ture time,  is  not  inconsistent  with  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  or  the 
views  pntertained  by  good  men  at  that  period  on  ihe  subject  of  the  resur- 
rection (see  Heb.  xi.  19.),  nor  is  it  at  variance  with  the  use  of  language. 
Rosenmiiller,  who  will  not  be  considered  as  biassed  towards  any  views  of 
texts  in  the  Old  Testament  particularly  coincident  with  doctrines  dis- 
closed in  the  New,  considers  the  passage  in  this  light,  and  the  23d  and 
24th  verses  as  intended  to  refer  to  the  highly  important  avowal  which 
immediately  follows.  His  translation  is  this  : 
25.  Equidem  scio  vindicem  meum  vivere, 
Eumque  novissimum  pulveri  adstiturum. 


470         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

26.  Et  fiostquam  corpus  meum,  hoc  inquam,  consumptum  fuerit. 

E  carne  mea  adspiciam  Deum. 
S7.  Quern  ego  visurus  sum  mihi; 
Oculi  spectabunt  mei,  non  alieni. 

In  the  25th  verse,  (the  former  clause  of  which  he  makes  equivalent  to 
xvi.  19.  where  Job  declares  that  he  hath  a  witness  in  heaven,)  he  consi- 
ders the  speaker  as  avowing  his  belief  that  God  will  continue  to  survive 
him,  and  that  he  who  permanently  endures  will  stand  by  him  and  show 
a  care  for  his  remains.  This,  says  he,  and  what  follows,  are  intended  as 
a  reply  to  the  unjust  suspicions  and  accusations  of  his  friends,  who  pro- 
nounced him  a  despiser  of  God  suffering  under  the  merited  punishment 
of  his  impiety,  in  opposition  to  which  charges  he  makes  this  solemn  pro- 
fession of  his  faith.  So  far  from  disregarding  God  or  accusing  him  of  in- 
justice, he  is  firmly  persuaded  that  after  his  death  he  will  appear  to  vin- 
dicate him,  and  the  eternal  existence  of  his  vindicator  constitutes  his 
consolation. 

The  manner  in  which  this  German  critic  expresses  himself  respecting 
the  belief  in  a  resurrection  being  entertained  by  Job,  is  worthy  of  atten- 
tion, and  particularly  as  Dr.  Jahn  seems  to  consider  it  as  a  doctrine  un- 
known in  the  patriarchal  age.  With  this  view  the  following  passage  is 
translated.  "Job  declares  in  the  clearest  terms  the  hope  which  he  con- 
stantly cherished  that  he  should  see  God  with  the  eyes  of  his  restored 
body.  Many  interpreters  indeed,  both  of  our  own  and  of  former  ages, 
deny  that  those  who  lived  at  the  time  when  this  book  was  written  enter- 
tained such  a  hope  as  that  which  this  passage  expresses  according  to  the 
interpretation  of  it  which  I  have  given,  and  H.  P.  C.  Henke*  has  shown 
that  many  fathers  of  the  church,  who  treat  of  the  resurrection,  either  en- 
tirely omit  this  text,  or  explain  it  in  reference  to  Job's  restoration  to  his 
forifler  happy  condition.  But  there  is  no  reason  to  deny  that  Job  che- 
rished the  hope  which  the  simple  sense  of  his  words  exhibits,  that  the 
sleep  of  his  death  would  not  be  eternal,  but  that  at  some  future  time 
God  himself  would  awaken  him,  and  that  God  would  not  cease  to  watch 
over  him  a  though  dead,  and  after  his  restoration  to  life  would  receive 
him  with  kindness  and  affection.  Since  this  oracle  respecting  the  Gael 
exhibits  the  most  confident  hope  and  unshaken  trust,  it  may  be  argued, 
that  as  Job  did  net  expect  any  termination  of  his  distresses  nor  any  rest 
in  the  present  world,  and  still  cherished  an  undoubted  hope  of  complete  de- 
liverance through  the  GoeL  he  must  have  had  in  mind  a  future  judgment, 
a  final  resurrection,  and  a  renewal  of  all  things."  RoSER.  Schol.  in  Job. 
Edit.  Sec.  1824,  p.  479—481.     Tr.] 

*  Narratio  critic*  de  interpretatione  loci  Job.  xix.  25—27.  Helmstad.  1783,  4to 


OF    THE    0L1>    TESTAMENT.  471 

§  192.     Of  JoVs  place  of  residence. 

The  country  in  which  Job  is  said  to  have  lived  is  called  I'^ijr,  XJz, 
1.  1.,  which  some  suppose  to  mean  Iduraea,  or  a  part  of  it,  deriving 
the  name  from  Uz,  the  grandson  of  Seir,  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxxvi, 
28.  Others  think  it  to  be  the  delightful  and  much  celebrated  valley 
of  Damascus,  the  inhabitants  of  which,  descendants  of  Shem,  are 
mentioned  under  the  name  of  Uz  in  Gen  x.  22,  23.,  and  are  called 
by  Ptolemy  Ozit<B  or  Uzitm,  Geog.  Lib.  V.  This  valley  is  no  doubt 
to  be  understood  vpherever  the  word  occurs  without  an  adjunct,  and 
especially  where  the  connected  circumstances  suit,  which  is  the  case 
in  this  book.  For  Job  is  not  only  represented  as  a  pious  and  virtu- 
ous man,  but  as  in  the  full  enjoyment  of  temporal  happiness,  to  which 
a  pleasant  residence  contributes  not  a  little.  Besides,  this  situation 
would  enable  him  to  carry  on  agricultural  pursuits  to  a  great  extent, 
to  support  his  numerous  flocks  in  the  neighbouring  desert  of  Arabia, 
and  like  the  Nomads,  sometimes,  as  he  tells  us  he  did,  to  enter  a  city, 
meaning  Damascus.  Here  also,  in  Auranitis  are  spacious  caves, 
which  even  in  the  age  of  Josephus  were  occupied  by  fierce  Troglo- 

dytae,  of  whom  Job  makes  mention. On  the  other  hand,  it  cannot 

be  proved  on  sufficient  evidence  that  a  part  of  Idumea  was  called  Uz 
from  the  grandson  of  Seir  of  the  same  name.  For  Jeremiah,  xxv. 
20,  21.,  distinguishes  the  king  of  Uz  from  the  king  of  Idumea,  and 
in  Lament,  iv.  31.  the  "daughter  of  Edom  dweUing  in  the  land  of 
Uz,"  is  a  colony  of  Edomites  who  had  settled  in  the  valley  of  Uz, 
which  had  been  depopulated  by  the  Assyrians.  Nor  were  Job's 
friends,  with  the  exception  of  Eliphaz,  Edomites.  But  if  they  had 
"been,  they  might  still  have  received  intelligence  of  ihe  distressing 
afilictions  of  so  distinguished  an  inhabitant  of  the  valley  of  Damas- 
cus.    Besides,  they  were  Nomads,  with  no  settled  habitation,  [a] 

(a)  EiCHHORN.  (Einleit.  §  639.)  is  decidedly  in  favour  of  fixing  Job's 
residence  in  Idumea.  He  adduces  highly  probable  evidence  that  this 
was  the  country  of  Job's  friends,  and  shows  that  the  contents  of  the 
book  and  the  customs  which  it  introduces  a-jree  with  his  opinion. 
Idumea,  in  tlie  earliest  ages,  was  distinguished  for  its  wise  men,  and  sen- 
tences of  Arabian  wisdom  flow  from  the  mouths  of  Job  and  his  friends. 
The  Jordan  is  represented  as  a  principal  stream,  as  it  was  to  the  Edom- 


<172  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  ROOK 

ites ;  and  chiefs,  such  as  those  of  Edom,  are  frequently  mentioned.  The 
Alexandrine  version  places  Job's  residence  on  the  borders  of  Idumea  and 
Arabia.  See  the  addition  at  the  end  of  the  last  chapter.  It  is  not  pro- 
bable, as  Eichhoru  remarks,  that  Job's  Iriends  lived  at  any  remote  dis- 
tance from  himself  He  ol>serves  too,  that  the  scenes  and  imagery  are 
not  Syriac,  but  for  the  most  part  Arabic  and  occasionally  Egyptian,  and 
that  the  exposition  given  by  our  author  of  Lament,  iv.  21,  which  is  that 
of  Vlichaelis  also,  is  founded  on  historical  conjecture,  and  not  supported 
by  the  structure  of  the  EJebrew,     He  does  not  take  any  notice  however 

of  Jer.  XXV.  20,21,  where  Uz  is  distinguished  irom  Edom  or  Idumea. 

Roseumiill-^r  re^jects  both  his  opinion  and  that  ol  Jahn,  and  places  the 
scene  of  the  poem  in  the  northern  part  of  Arabia  Deserta,  bordering  on 
the  Euphrates  and  Mesopotamia.      See  his  Prolegomena  in  Jobum,  Vol. 

V.  El.  See.  Lips.  1824. The  authorities  and  part  of  the  evidence  in 

favour  of  Eichhorn's  opinion,  which,  upon  the  whole,  appears  to  be  the 
most  probable  of  the  three,  are  stated  at  some  length  by  Magee,  Disc, 
on  Atonement,  Note  LIX.  Vol.  II.  p.  56.  s..  and  Hurive,  Introd.  Vol.  IV. 
pp.  72.  3.     TV.] 


§  193.     Of  the  time  in  which  Job  lived. 

The  age  in  which  the  author  of  the  book  places  Job  may  be  drawn 
from  what  he  says  of  the  friends.  For  the  tribe  of  Shuah,  from 
which  Bildad  was  descended,  sprang  from  the  posterity  of  Abraham, 
Gen,  XXV.  1,2.;  and  that  of  Tcman,  which  gave  birth  to  Ehphaz, 
was  of  the  family  of  Esau  Gen.  xxxvi.  1 5.  The  age  therefore  in 
which  Job  lived,  is  not  only  considerably  below  the  time  of  Abraham, 
but  even  that  of  Esau.  Yet  it  must  not  be  placed  too  far  below  the 
time  of  Esau  for  nothing  occurs  in  the  work  respecting  the  famous 
exode  of  the  Hebrews  from  Egypt,  and  Job  attained  the  age  of  200 
years,  whereas  shortly  after  the  exode  the  period  of  human  life  rarely 
extended  beyond  70  or  80  years.  Job  therefore  seems  to  be  put  in 
the  age  immediately  preceding  the  removal  of  the  Israelites  from 
Egypt.  This  is  confirmed  by  certain  other  marks,  such  as  the  quo- 
ting of  ancient  poems,  by  which  in  remote  ages  wisdom  was  pre- 
served, viii.  8 — 18.  xii.  12—25.  xv   17 — 35.;  the  name  r\Q'iffD,kesita, 

applied  to  a  certain  quantity  of  money,  xhi.  1 1,  as  in  Gen.  xxxiii.  19 ; 
and  the  mentioning  of  no  other  species  of  idolatry  but  the  worship  of 
the  sun  and  moon,  x.xxi.  26 — 28. fa] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMEiNT.  473 

la)  See  this  subject  more  fully  examined  in  Maoee,  ubi  supra,  p.  58 
— 63.  and  Horne,  Introd.  IV.  67.  ss.,  who  both  arrive  at  the  same  con- 
clusion with  the  author.     TV.] 

§  194.     The  rank  of  Joh. 

As  c.  xix.  9.  does  not  refer  to  a  diadem  and  royal  vesture,  but  is  sim- 
ply expressive  of  humiliation  and  grief,  there  is  no  reason  to  consider 
Job  and  his  friends  as  kings.  This  is  at  variance  with  other  circum- 
stances in  the  book.  1)  Job  does  not  lose  a  kingdom,  but  children, 
servants  and  flocks.  2)  He  had  no  army  to  pursue  the  robbers. 
3)  He  is  accused  by  his  friends  of  criminal  harshness  towards  his  ser- 
vants, not  of  tyranny  to  his  subjects.  4)  Job  speaks  of  his 
treatment  of  his  servants,  but  says  nothing  of  his  conduct  to  his  sub- 
jects. 5)  He  mentions  kings,  c.  iii.  14.  ix.  24.  but  does  not  compare 
himself  with  them. 

But  on  the  other  hand  Job  does  not  appear  as  a  subject,  for  neither 
he  nor  his  friends  speak  of  his  behaviour  towards  the  king  ;  on  the 
contrary  when  Job  enters  into  the  gate  of  the  city,  the  accustomed 
place  of  judgment  and  resort  of  loiterers,  he  takes  the  most  elevated 
station,  and  his  opinion  is  sought. The  numerous  flocks  and  ex- 
tensive husbandry  of  Job  show,  that  he  was  a  chief  among  the  nomads, 
who  at  the  same  time  carried  on  agricultural  pursuits  ;  a  powerful 
man  indeed,  but  by  no  means  equal  to  Abraham. 

That  Job's  disease  was  the  scabbed  or  black  leprosy  I  have  shown  in 
my  Archaeologie,  I.  Th.  II.  B.  §  230.  S.  381—384.*  Compare  also  the 
description  of  this  disease  in  Hensler's  Geschichte  des  Abendlandis- 
clien  Aussatzes,  S.  47,  52,  55—59. 

§   195.     Tlie  Book  of  Job  is  the  work  of  one  author. 

The  parts  of  the  book  of  Job  are  so  intimately  connected  that  they 
cannot  be  separated  without  violence.  The  introduction  supplies  us 
with  the  necessary  information  relating  to  Job  and  his  friends,  shows 
the  writer's  design,  and  points  at  a  distance,  as  it  were,  to  the  end  of 

*  [For  an  account  of  the  disease,  see  the  Archaeology,  Upham's  translation,  <*  188, 
189,     Tr.] 

60 


474  PARTICULAK    INTRODUCTION    TO  EACH    BOOK 

Job's  calamities  related  in  the  conclusion.     This  again  refers  to  the 

introduction.     All   the  discourses   proceed   in  a  regular  order. 

Those  who  ascribe  the  introduction  or  conclusion,  or  discourses  of 
Ehhu  to  some  other  writer,[a]  urge  the  difference  of  style.  But  in 
The  introduction  and  conclusion  the  author  designedly  uses  the  plain 
style  of  prose,  as  it  was  not  his  intention  to  deliver  his  own  discourses 
in  poetry,  but  only  those  of  his  characters.  The  use  of  the  name  Je- 
hovah in  the  prose  parts,  while  it  never  occurs  in  the  discussion,* 
only  proves  that  in  the  one  a  Hebrew  is  the  narrator,  and  in  the  other 
the  speakers  are  Arabians  to  whom  the  name  was  foreign.  The  pe- 
culiarity observable  in  the  discourse  of  Ehhu  is  to  be  attributed  to  the 
skill  of  the  author,  who  had  the  address  to  distinguish  the  youth  by 

the  character  of  his  speech. Besides,  by  the  removal  of  those  parts 

a  work  of  extraordinary  elegance  is  injured.  Without  the  introduc- 
tion the  reader  knows  not  who  Job  and  his  friends  were,  and  why  so 
many  deep  afflictions  had  befallen  the  former.  The  speech  of  Ehhu 
affords  a  transition  from  the  last  words  of  Job  to  the  discourse  of  God. 
tor  which  it  prepares  the  reader.     The  conclusion  is  necessary  to 

inform  us  what  became  of  Job. '  But  why  is  no  mention  made  of 

Ehhu,  either  in  the  introduction,  or  in  the  discourse  of  God,  or  in  the 

conclusion  ?'■ As  he  did  not  come  with  the  other  friends,  he  could 

not  be  mentioned  in  the  introduction  which  relates  their  visit.  As 
he  did  not  speak  until  all  were  silent  and  received  no  reply  fiom  any 
one,  there  was  no  occasion  to  mention  him  in  the  several  discourses. 
In  that  of  God  and  in  the  conclusion,  he  is  passed  over  in  silence  as 
an  orator  who  in  a  multitude  of  words  had  laboriously  said  nothing 
that  had  not  been  already  uttered  by  others,  except  the  single  re- 
mark, that  God  urges  sinners  to  self-examination  and  repentance  by 
dreams,  by  messengers  or  angels,  and  by  calamitous  events  ;  and  even 
this  had  in  effect  been  said  by  the  others,  although  in  different  lan- 
guage. 

[a)  De  Wette,  Einieil.  5  287,  with  some  other  Geiman  -writers  ot 
less  note,  deny  the  genuineness  of  the  speech  of  Elihii.  The  same  per- 
sons doubt  the  genuineness  of  the  introduction  and  conclusion,  or  as  they 
term  them,  prologue  and  epilogue,  of  the  book.     TV.} 

*  [In  xii.  9.  the  word  has  been  introduced  by  the  error  of  some  transcriber. } 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEM  •  17/; 


_>   1  yC.     The  Hebrew  text  is  not  a  version,  [a] 

riiat  the  disputants  are  Arabians,  is  no  proof  that  the  book  was 
-nginally  written  in  their  language,  and  that  the  present  Hebrew  is  a 
iianslation.  Many  passages  do  indeed  occur,  which  must  be  explained 
liom  the  Arabic  ;  but  it  is  not  at  all  surprising  that  in  a  lofty  poem  we 
find  many  of  the  less  common  words  and  ideas,  which  the  Hebrew, 
through  the  poverty  of  its  literature,  has  lost,  while  they  have  been 
preserved  by  the  Arabic,  the  richest  of  the  sister  dialects.  The  Ara- 
bic orthography  frequently  occurs,  especially  the  omission  of  the 
Aleph,  as  W  for  Nity,  xv.  31.  Thn  for  tinSd,  xxxii.  18.     But  this  is 

no  mark  of  a  version,  but  merely  a  proof  that  the  author  had  lived  a 
considerable  time  among  the  Arabians.  All  doubt  on  this  question  is 
removed  by  the  character  of  the  style  which  is  such  as  no  version 
could  exhibit.  [6] 

[a)  Comp.EiCHHORN,  (Einleit.  5  641. 1.)  and  particularly  De  Wette. 
Einleit.  ^  291  anm.  a),  where  there  are  numerous  references  given,  in 
proof  of  the  Hebrew  origin  of  the  book.     TV.] 

[6)  "  The  language,"  says  Eichhorn,  ubi  supra,  "  is  too  strong  and 
nervous  ;  the  sentences  are  too  pointed  ;  the  style  is  too  full  and  round, 
and  harmoniously  constructed.  The  remarkable  parallelism,  which  is  in 
no  book  so  accurately  kept  up  from  beginning  to  end,  would  be  unattain- 
able in  a  translation.     Tr.'\ 

§  197.     The  Author  of  the  Book  of  Job  was  a  Hebreic. 

As  the  book  was  vrritten  in  Hebriew  and  not  in  Arabic,  there  can 
be  no  question  that  its  author  was  a  Hebrew,  for  none  other  could 
have  used  that  language  with  so  much  flexibility.  In  no  other  an- 
cient  nation  are  to  be  found  such  views  of  the  Deity  and  of  morals  as 
are  displayed  in  Job  ;  and  the  use  of  the  name  Jehovah  in  the  intro- 
duction and  conclusion,  shows  the  author  to  have  been  a  Hebrew. 
It  is  a  mistake,  therefore,  to  suppose  that  it  is  the  work  of  some 
Edomite  or  Arab,  from  whom  the  Hebrews  would  not  have  received 
the  book  as  a  sacred  composition.  If  frequent  Arabisms  occur,  no- 
thing more  can  be  inferred  from  this  than  the  author's  long  residence 


476  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

in  Arabia.  He  certainly  did  not  live  in  Palestine,  for  he  is  totalh 
silent  on  matters  relating  to  this  country,  while  he  shows  himself  well 
acquainted  with  those  which  relate  to  Egypt  and  Arabia  ;  which 
would  be  wholly  unaccountable  in  a  native,  and  resident  of  Palestine. 

§  198.     Does  the  Book  of  Job  belong  to  the  period  of  the  Babylonian 

Captivity. 

The  artificial  construction  of  the  book  of  Job,  the  elegance  and 
sublimity  of  its  style,  the  strongly  marked  traits  of  the  respective  cha- 
racters which  are  maintained  through  the  whole  of  the  discussion, 
the  increase  of  feeling  with  the  progress  of  the  debate,  together  with 
the  purity  of  the  language,  abundantly  prove,  that  it  is  not  the  pro- 
duction of  an  age,  when  the  Hebrews  conquered-  cut  off,  and  exiled, 
possessed  neither  inchnation  nor  means  for  the  cultivation  of  elegant 
literature.  The  question,  moreover,  which  is  discussed  in  the  book, 
and  had  been  treated  in  Ps.  xxxvii.  xxxix.  and  Ixxiii.  could  not  be 
agitated  in  the  time  of  the  Babylonian  captivity,  when  the  Hebrews, 
not  innocent,  like  Job,  but  idolatrous  and  corrupted  with  all  kinds  of 
vice,  were  suffering  the  just  punishment  of  their  wickedness.  The 
Satan  or  accuser  who  is  introduced  in  this  book  is  not  the  devil  or 
the  Ahriman  of  the  Magians,  but  some  one  of  the  sons  or  ministers 
of  God,[a]  distinguished  from  the  others  simply  by  this,  that  assuming 
to  himself  more  than  ordinary  sagacity  in  discovering  hidden  wicked 
ness,  he  was  accustomed  to  seek  out.  and  trace,  and  denounce  some 
evil  or  other  in  every  thing.  Nor  are  the  sons  of  God  to  be  consi- 
dered as  modern  notions  of  the  Magians,  for  attendants  of  this  kind 
are  mentioned  in  Gen.  xxviii.  12.  xxxii.  1.  Ex.  xxxiii.  1 — 6.  I  Kings 
xxii.  19.  and  Isa.  vi.;  and  indeed  these  sentiments  of  the  Magians  were 
by  no  means  novel  in  the  time  of  Zoroaster,  who  himself  contends  for 

their  very  great  antiquity. The  forms  of  words  which  have  been 

called  Chaldee,  are  also  Arabic. 

[a)  See  Magee  on  Atonement.  Vol.  11,  p.  67.  ss.     Tr.] 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  477 

§  199.     Does  the  Book  of  Job  belong  to  the  age  of  Solomon. 

So  much  attention  was  paid  to  literature  in  the  age  of  Solomon, 
and  even  in  that  of  David,  that  the  book  of  Job  could  have  been  writ- 
ten by  some  person  of  that  period.  But  then  he  must  have  seen 
Arabia  and  Egypt,  and  that  not  during  the  short  space  of  time  af- 
forded by  a  journey  ;  he  must  have  made  those  countries  the  places 
of  long  residence,  must  have  rendered  all  tlieir  objects  so  familiar  to 
him  as  to  use  them  with  readiness  on  all  occasions.  Perhaps  also, 
(although  this  is  not  probable  )  he  might  have  forgotten  all  Hebrew 
objects,  and  have  brought  forward  a  scene  altogether  Arabian. 
But  the  question  is  not  whether  it  were  possible  to  write  such  a 
book  in  that  age,  but  whether  it  be  probable  that  the  book  of  Job 
was  then  composed,   when    nothing  similar  is  to  be  found  among 

many  writings  of  that  time. It  is  not  mentioned  among  the  works 

of  Solomon  in  I  Kings  v.  12,  13.  (iv.  32   33.) 

The  arguments  which  are  advanced  in  favour  of  this  opinion  are  of 
little  weight.  The  most  important  is  that  many  words  occur  which 
are  used  in  the  book  of  Proverbs.  But  this  only  proves  that  the 
book  of  Job,  being  more  ancient,  had  been  carefully  read  by  the  au- 
thor, (or,  if  it  be  preferred  the  authors,)  of  the  Proverbs,  and  its 
words  transferred  from  sublime  poetry  to  acute  and  sententious  say- 
ings.  But  on  the  other  hand  many  expressions  occur  in  the  book 

of  Job  which  are  scarcely  or  never  to  be  met  with  except  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, as  pj  and  id:  in  Job  xviii.  19.  and  Gen.  xxi.  23,  and  else- 
where only  in  Isa.  xiv.  22.  ;  edt  only  in  Job  xvi.  11.  and  Num.  xxii. 
32. ;  yi  in  Job  xxxix.  26.  and  Lev.  xi.  16.  Deut.  xiv.  16 ;  HD'typ  in 
Job  xlii.  11.  Gfen.  xxxiii.  19.  and  Jos.  xxiv.  32.  ;  D'S''7£3  in  Job  xxxi. 
11.  Ex.  xxi.  22.  Deut.  xxxii.  31.;  r\HMr\  in  Job  xxxiii.  10.  and  Num. 

xiv.  34.  And  further  expressions  which  are  not  to  be  met  with  in 
the  Pentateuch  rarely  or  never  occur  in  Job,  as  hi,  which  is  used 

twelve  times  in  Proverbs,  and  in  the  other  books  more  than  fifty 
times,  but  in  Job  only  once,  xli.  15. ;  ni^N,  which  in  Job  only  occurs 


178  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

in  V.  17. ;  r\)ii2)i  mnv  the  prefix  ^,  and  other  words  in  common  use. 

Besides,  some  ancient  words  are  observable,  which  are  never  found 
elsewhere.     Comp.  i.  22.  xlii.  8  ,  and  oVix  in  i.  11.  ii.  5.  v.  8.  xi. 

5,  xii.  7.  xiii.  3   4.  xiv.  18.  xvii    10.  xxxii.   1. Lastly,  it  is  not 

probable,  that  the  name  of  the  author    if  he  had  lived  in  the  time  of 
David  or  of  Solomon  would  not  have  been  preserved  to  posterity,  [a] 

[a)  In  hi8  German  Introduction,  p.  787—799.  the  author  examines  the 
arguments  in  defence  of  the  opinion  that  the  work  belongs  to  the  age  of 
Solomon,  which  are  aJvancecJ  in  Stauedlin's  Beitraege  zur  Philosophic 
und  Geschichte  der  Religion  und  Sittenlehre,  II  Th.  1797.  S.  235—255. 
The  arguments  for  thnt  opinion  are  also  given  by  Rosenmcellbr,  Pro!, 
in  Scholia,  }  vii.  p.  36.  ss..    Tr.] 

§  200.     Whether  Juh  was  ivritten  prior  to  the  Exode. 

In  the  book  of  Job  we  meet  with  nothing  which  could  not  have 
been  written  before  the  Exode.  Now  it  is  quite  improbable  that  o 
writer  posterior  to  this  event  should  have  possessed  so  much  ingenuity 
and  art,  as  to  transfer  liimself  entirely  to  such  a  remote  antiquity,  and, 
altogether  unmindful  of  the  events  of  his  own  age,  to  write  as  if  he 
had  lived  antecedently  to  the  Exode.  Neither  is  it  easy  to  conceive, 
that  a  Hebrew  of  Palestine  should  acquire  such  a  profound  knowledge 
of  Egypt  and  Arabia,  as  the  author  of  this  book  exhibits.  Great  art 
is  indeed  discoverable  in  the  arrangement,  in  the  elocution,  and  in 
the  character  of  the  persons  introduced  ;  but  not  so  great  as  to  be  in- 
compatible with  that  age,  of  which  we  have  poems  extant  in  Ex.  xv. 
Deut.  xxxii.  Ps.  xc.  Num.  xxi.  27 — 30.  xxiii.  7 — 10,  18 — 24  xxiv. 
3 — 9,  15 — 24.  These,  as  well  as  the  poems  of  Job  xxvii.  1.  xxix. 
1.  are  called  D'^^C'D  ;  a  term,  by  which  Solomon  does  not  designate 

sublime  poetry,  but  sententious  sayings. 

,  §  201 .     Of  the  Author  of  the  book  of  Job. 

It  was  the  opinion  of  the  Talmudists,  and  of  many  of  the  Greek 
and  Syrian  fathers,  that  this  book  was  written  by  Moses.  He  was  a 
man  endowed  with  extraordinary  mental  qualities,  as  is  attested  by 
his  actions,  his  books  and  his  poems.     A  residence  of  40  years  in 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  479 

Egypt  and  40  in  Arabia  made  him  thoroughly  acquainted  with  those 
countries.  In  the  Pentateuch  he  displays  also  a  vast  knowledge  of 
arts,  and  of  natural  history,  and  especially  of  that  of  the  leprosy.  He 
constantly  and  with  seriousness  inculcates  the  religion  of  the  one  true 
God  which  he  had  received  from  his  ancestors,  together  with  the 
strictest  morality.  All  these  characteristics  occur  in  the  book  of 
Job,  which  also  maintains  a  deep  silence  respecting  Palestine  and 
subjects  connected  with  it,  where  Moses  never  was.  The  coinci- 
dence of  this  book  with  what  we  find  in  the  writings  of  Moses  renders 
it  highly  probable  that  he  was  the  author,  [a] 

[a)  See,  however,  Magee,  ubi  supra,  p.  82.  ss.  or  Horne,  Introd. 
IV,  p.  74.  who  suppose  the  book  to  have  been  written  before  the  time  of 
Moses.  In  this  opinion  also,  Eichhorn  agrees,  and  supports  it  at  length, 
^  641,  642.  So  also  Stuhlmann,  and  Bertholdt,  as  cited  by  De 
Wette.  Michaelis,  Kennicott,  and  many  others,  agree  with  Jahn. 
Tr.] 

§  202.     Objections  to  the  opinion  that  Moses  is  the  author  of  this 

Book. 

•'  But  in  the  books  of  Moses,  uprightness  is  always  connected  with 
happiness,  and  wickedness  with  misery  ;  and  since  the  author  of  the 
book  of  Job  denies  that  such  affinity  exists,  he  cannot  be  Moses.''"' 

If  the  book  of  Job  were  indeed  in  this  respect  repugnant  to  the 
writii  gs  of  Moses,  the  Hebrews  would  never  have  admitted  it  into 
the  Canon.  But  so  far  are  the  two  works  from  presenting  any  con- 
trariety of  sentiment  on  this  point,  that  they  are  found,  upon  an  accu- 
rate examination,  entirely  to  correspond. 1)    Job  is  at   length 

restored,  and  becomes  happier  than  before  his  affliction,  which  agrees 
exactly  with  the  history  that  Moses  has  given  of  Joseph,  xxxvii.  1 — ■ 

1.  26. 2)    Job  delivers  his  opinion,  in   language  heightened  by 

feehng  that  good  men  may  be  miserable  and  bad  happy  ;  but  he 
never  questions  the  advantages  of  virtue,  and  that  ordinarily  it  leads 
to  fehcity,  and  that  on  the  contrary,  vice  is  injurious,  and  ordinarily 
leads  to  misery.  The  principle  which  he  contends  for  is  this,  that 
this  connexion  is  not  perpetual  and  invariable,  but  liable  to  many 
exceptions,  the  reasons  of  which  are  beyond  the  reach  of  mortals. 
A.nd  was  not  Moses  instructed  in  this  very  truth  by  the  example  of 


480    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

the  oppressed  Hebrews  in  Egypt,  of  whom  very  many  righteous  men 
must  have  fallen  victims  to  the  calamities  by  which  they  were  over- 
whelmed, while  their  oppressors  enjoyed  themselves  to  the  end  of  life  ? 
It  was  therefore  well  known  to  him  that  the  connexion  of  virtue  and 
happiness  and  of  vice  and  misery  was  not  necessary.  But  it  would 
not  have  comported  with  the  design  of  the  Pentateuch  to  touch  this 
point ;  for  there  it  was  proper  to  give  precepts  and  to  urge  the  ob- 
servance of  them  by  suitable  reasons,  whereas  to  state  that  happiness 
did  not  always  correspond  with  virtuous  character,  would  have  been 
to  weaken  the  disposition  and  the  efforts  to  obey.  It  is  plain  from 
history,  that  by  virtue  nations  constantly  struggle  through  difficulties 
and  rise  to  distinction  whereas  vice  enervates  and  depresses.  This  is 
the  point  which  is  urged  by  Moses  in  the  Pentateuch,  whereas  in  Job 

the  discourse  relates  to  individuals,  not  to  communities. 3)  The 

design  of  God  in  afflicting  Job  as  it  is  explained  in  the  first  two  chap- 
ters, was  to  manifest  his  sincerity  and  integrity  ;  and  not  only  do  such 
tests  of  character  occur  in  the  histories  of  Abraham  and  Joseph  but 
in  the  subsequent  books,  Moses  frequently  warns  the  Hebrews  to 
avoid  certain  things,  because  they  were  permitted  by  God  to  try 
them.  See  Ex.  xv  25.  xx.  20.  Deut.  vii.  19,  viii.  2,  16,  16.  xiii.  3, 
4.  xxix.  3.  Job  therefore  does  not  disagree  with  the  Pentateuch  with 
respect  to  doctrine. 

And  if  the  character  of  the  language  breathes  of  Arabia,  and  the 
tropes,  allegories  and  comparisons  are  taken  from  that  country,  it  is 
by  no  means  to  be  concluded  that  Moses  was  not  the  author,  since  he 
was  so  long  a  resident  among  the  Arabians.  It  is  generally  urged, 
that  such  an  use  of  Arabian  materials  requires  the  author  to  have  been 
educated  in  Arabia,  since  the  character  of  a  poet  continues  as  it  was 
formed  in  youth.  But  this  can  by  no  means  be  admitted,  for  the 
ardent  genius  and  vivid  imagination  of  the  poet  readily  receives  any 
impressions  and  changes  with  change  of  residence.  Lastly,  many 
things  occur  in  Job  which  are  plainly  of  Egyptian  origin,  verifying  the 
observation. 

Quo  fuerit  imbuta  recens,  servabit  odorem.[a] 

[a)  Eichhorn  lays  great  stress  on  this  circumstance,  that  figures  and  il- 
lustrations taken  from  Arabia  are  constantly  occurring  as  it  were  sponta- 
neously, while  those  which  the  author  draws  from  Egypt  are  less  fre- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENl .  IHl 

quent ;  whence  he  concludes  that  Egypt  could  not  have  been  his  native 

country. But  surely  a  long  residence  in  Arabia,  with  the  objects  on 

which  his  figures  were  founded  ever  before  his  eyes,  will  sufficiently  ac- 
count for  the  poet's  frequent  reference  to  those  objects.  Eichhorn  thinks 
that  the  book  was  written  by  some  Hebrew  who  had  not  descended  to 
Egypt  with  his  brethren,  (which,  he  says,  must  have  been  the  case  with 
many  of  that  people,  as  the  country  of  Goshen  could  not  have  supported 
all  their  cattle,  comp.  I  Chron.  vii.  21.),  but  had  settled  in  some  part  of 
Arabia  in  the  vicinity  of  Egypt,  to  which  country,  the  principal  residence 
of  his  nation,  he  supposes  this  master  spirit  to  have  travelled,  as  did  Ho- 
mer. See  Einleit.  (j  642,  S.  171.  Rosenmiiller  is  in  favour  of  a  late 
date,  and  supposes  the  work  to  be  a  production  of  the  period  which 
elapsed  between  the  times  of  Hezekiah  and  Zedekiah.  Proleg.  VI!. 
p.  41.     Tr.] 


•^  203.     The  design  of  Moses  in  ivriting  the  Book  of  Job. 

If  Moses  is  the  author  of  the  work,  he  wrote  it  while  a  fugitive  from 
Egypt,  during  his  residence  in  Arabia.  This  is  confirmed  by  many 
circumstances  in  the  book  itself;  such  as,  the  omission  of  matters  re- 
lating to  the  Hebrews,  the  use  of  words  in  meanings  different  from 
those  which  were  afterwards  attached  to  them  by  the  law,  the  Arabic 
orthography,  and  the  tropes  and  figures  drawn  firom  the  country.  It 
seems  to  have  been  the  intention  of  Moses,  to  exhibit  Job  to  the  He-^ 
brews,  as  an  illustrious  example  of  piety,  integrity,  and  constancy  in ' 
affliction,  in  order  to  induce  them,  while  oppressed  in  Egypt,  to  per- 
severe in  the  worship  of  the  one  true  Gon.  Accordingly,  he  repre- 
sents the  calamities  of  Job  as  probationary,  serving  as  a  test  of  his 
j^iety  and  virtue ;  and  by  the  termination  of  Job's  afflictions,  he  con- 
firms their  hope  of  deliverance.  He  proposes  these  instructions  in 
an  indirect  way,  and  accommodates  them  not  to  the  people  as  a  body^ 
but  to  individuals,  whose  duty  it  was  to  bear  their  trials  with  patience 
and  to  persevere  in  the  way  of  duty.  Hence  he  explains  in  the  first 
two  chapters  the  design  of  the  Almighty  in  afflicting  Job,  which  any 
Hebi-ew  might  apply  to  himself.  An  allusion  to  the  Hebrews  seems 
to  be  evident  in  the  discourses  of  Job  and  his  friends  ;  for  it  can 
scarcely  be  doubted  that  similar  discussions  took  place  among  reli- 
gious Hebrews,  mindful  of  the  divine  promises,  and  their  irreligious 
brethren,  or  Egyptians,  and  that  many  of  the  Hebrews  were  in  thiF 

61 


482    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

way  led  to  the  worship  of  idols  ;  a  result  which  it  was  the  object  of 
Moses  in  this  work  to  guard  against  and  prevent,  [a] 

[a)  In  the  German  Introduction,  p.  810 — 812,  some  objections  of  Mich- 
aelis  are  stated  ;  viz.,  that  in  Job  the  controversy  does  not  relate  to  the 
causes  of  the  happiness  or  misery  of  nations,  but  of  individuals  ;  that  the 
sufferings  of  Job  contain  no  allusion  however  remote  to  the  oppressions 
of  the  Hebrews ;  that  Job  never  loses  his  independence,  like  them  ;  and, 
that  there  is  no  reference  to  the  promises  which  the  Hebrews  had  inhe- 
rited from  their  progenitor  Abraham. 

But,  says  the  author,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  at  the  time  of  writing 
the  work  Moses  was  not  at  the  head  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  and  had  no 
idea  that  he  was  to  become  their  leader.  It  would  not  therefore  have 
been  proper  for  him  to  address  himself  to  them  or  to  speak  of  them  as  a 
body  ;  consequently  he  considers  the  Egyptian  oppression  in  the  light  of 
an  individual  calamity,  and  selects  a  single  person  to  serve  as  the  ex- 
ample which  he  wished  to  exhibit.  The  important  point  was,  to  disclose 
the  divine  purpose  in  the  afflictions  of  Job,  and  in  the  parallel  case  of  the 
Hebrews.  He  chose  to  avoid  all  particular  allusion  to  the  oppressions  of 
the  latter,  and  all  mention  of  their  particular  circumstances,  and  might 
well  hope  to  make  a  strong  impression,  by  representing  the  illustrious 
example  of  an  unhappy  pious  Arabian,  who,  by  his  perseverance  in  piety, 

was  restored  to  prosperity  after  great  distresses. The  opinion  that 

Moses  was  the  author  of  the  book  receives  therefore  an  additional  degree 
of  probability ;  at  least  no  other  opinion  agrees  so  accurately  with  the 
history  of  the  time. 

To  this  it  may  be  added,  that  it  was  sufficient  for  the  writer's  purpose 
that  a  general  degree  of  resemblance  should  exist ;  and,  that  any  refe- 
rence to  the  promises  made  to  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  in  a  poem 
founded  on  facts  which  had  transpired  in  Arabia  or  Idumea.  and  relatino- 
to  a  native  of  either  of  those  countries,  would  have  been  irrelative  and 
therefore  objectionable. 

The  reasoning  in  this  section,  it  may  be  observed,  will  be  equally  con- 
clusive in  favour  of  the  opinion  of  Magee  and  others,  that  the  book  of  j 
Job  was  written  before  the  time  of  Moses,  but  edited,  with  some  addi-  1 
tions  and  alterations,  by  him  during  his  residence  in  Arabia,  to  subserve 
the  divine  purpose  of  shortly  delivering  the  Hebrews  from  their  bondage 
—provided  that  the  other  course  of  reasoning  on  which  that  opinion  iSj 
founded,  be  deemed  sufficient.  Magee  on  Atonement,  II.  82.  ss.   7V.1 


ikp    THK    OLD    TESTAMENT.  18.S 


CHAPTER  n 


OP   THE   SONG   OP   SONGS,    OR   CANTICLE;* 


§  204.    Contents  of  the  Canticles. 
The  little  work  which  bears   the   title  of  D'TK/n  "I't^j  Song  of 

Songs,  or  the  most  beautiful  song,  comprehends  several  amatory 
poems.  Interpreters  differ  very  much  with  respect  to  the  separation 
of  these  poems  ;  it  appears  to  me  that  the  distribution  of  tiie  differ- 
ent songs  should  be  as  follows. 

1 )  An  innocent  country  maiden  makes  an  undisguised  pi-ofession 
of  her  attachment,  and  her  lover,  a  shepherd,  replies  to  it  with  equal 
protestation  of  affection,  i.  2 — ii.  7.  Some  prefer  concluding  this 
dialogue  at  i.  11.,  and  making  i.  12 — ii.  7.  a  soliloquy,  in  which  the 
maiden  is  supposed  to  repeat  some  compliments  of  her  lover.     But 

this  is  without  sufficient  reason. 2)  A  maiden  sings  of  her  lover, 

who  is  seeking  her  everywhere,  and  she  also  confesses  her  warm  af- 
fection, ii.  8 — iii.  5.  Some  suppose  that  ii.  8 — 14.  is  a  dream,  and 
that  in  v.  15.  the  maiden  awakes,  who  dreams  again  in  iii.  1 — 5.  But 
if  these  places  are  similar  to  dreams,  it  ought  to  be  remembered  that 
waking  dreams  are  not  uncommon  with  lovers.  This  the  poet,  true 
to  nature,  has  here  represented. 3)  A  maiden,  in  a  litter  sur- 
rounded by  Solomon's  soldiers,  is  brought  to  the  harem  of  the  king. 
The  lover  prefers  far  before  all  the  royal  beauties  his  own  beloved, 
in  whose  society  he  declares  that  he  is  happier  than  the  king  himself, 
iii.  6 — v.  1 .  Some  choose  to  make  iv.  8 — v.  1 .  a  distinct  poem,  but 
they  can  hardly  offer  any  sufficient  reason  for  separating  this  portion 
from  the  other.     Nevertheless,  the  distribution  of  the  work  into  its 


484  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

several  parts  must  be  left  very  much  to  the  reader's  own  taste  and 

feeling. 4)  A  maiden  beloved  sings  of  her  lover.     He  had  come 

to  her  door  at  night,  and  had  fled  away  before  she  opened  it.     She 
seeks  him,  is  beaten  by  the  watch,  and  stripped  of  her  vail.     She  de 
scribes  the  beauty  of  her  lover,  who  at  length  answers,  celebrating 
her  loveliness,  with  a  contemptuous  glance  at  the  mvltitude  of  the 

king's  wives,  v.  2 — vi.  9. 5)  Shulamith  recounts  in  few  words  the 

allurements  of  the  courtiers  whom  she  had  met  with  unexpectedly  in 
the  garden,  and  her  rejection  of  them,  and  celebrates  her  affection 
for  her  lover,  vi.  10 — viii  3. 6)  Protestations  and  praises  of  con- 
stant affection,  vui.  4 — 7 7)  A  discourse  between  two  brothers 

about  guarding  and  giving  away  their  sister  in  marriage,  who  replies 

with  scorn,  that  she  would  be  her  own  guardian,  viii  8 — 12. 8)  A 

fragment.  A  lover  wishes  to  hear  his  beloved.  She  replies  by  per- 
suading him  to  fly  ;  perhaps  because  her  parents  or  relations  were 
near,  who  in  the  East  never  allow  such  meetings,  viii.  13,  14, [a] 

[a)  Some  of  the  preceding  statements,  especially  the  three  last,  are 
sufficiently  fanciful.  The  reader  must  exercise  his  own  judgment  in  re- 
ceiving or  rejecting  them. The  opinion  that  the  Song  of  Songs  is 

made  up  of  several  dic*inct  idyls,  has  been  advanced  by  Bauer,  Eich- 
horn,  De  Wette,  Sir  William  Jones,  and  Good.  See  Horne,  Introd.  IV. 
127.  s.,  EiCHH.  Einleit.  §  649.  S,  230.  ff.,  and  De  Wette,  Einleit. 
§  276.  anm.  f)  g)  h).     Tr.] 

§  205.    Whether  the  different  parts  of  the  Canticles  are  connected,  so 
as  to  form  one  poem. 

Those  writers  who  are  of  the  opinion  that  these  parts  constitute 
one  complete  drama,  under  the  guise  of  which  subsists  a  real  his- 
tory,[a]  are  involved  in  great  difficulties,  and  take  too  many  things 
for  granted  to  satisfy  the  minds  of  learned  men.*  Besides,  a  real 
history  is  very  seldom  the  ground  work  of  amatory  poems  which  are 
founded,  for  the  most  part,  on  circumstances  of  common  occurrence. 
The  reader,  who  does  not  anxiously  hunt  after  a.  connexion,  will 

*  [See  Salomo's  verschmaehte  Liebe,  Leipzig,  1790,  [by  Ammon,]  or  Eichhorn'S 
Bibliothek,  Th.  II.  S.  1062.  S. Staeudlin  has  in  some  degree  simplified  this  hy- 
pothesis, see  Memorabilia  des  Paultts,  St.  II.  S.  178.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  485 

readily  perceive  that  the  Canticles  consist  of  several  disconnected 
poems,  and  that  the  materials  which  compose  the  work  are  such  inci- 
dents as  were  common  among  the  Hebrews  ;  because  some  verses 
are  repeated  as  in  ii  7.  iii.  5.  viii.  4.,  and  some  fragments  occur, 
as  viii.  4 — 7.,  8 — 12.  and  13,  14.  But  it  must  be  acknowledged 
that  it  is  difficult  to  determine  the  commencement  and  the  end  of 
each  poem  [J] 

[a)  This  alludes  to  the  opinion  of  Bossuet,  who  considered  this  book 
as  a  regular  drama,  divided  into  spveii  parts,  to  be  represented  on  seven 
successive  days.  This  opinion  is  countenanced  by  Lowth.  See  HoRNE, 
Introd.  IV.  127.,  and  comp    De  Wette,  Einleit.  J  276.     Tr.] 

[b)  EiCHHORN.  Einleit.  649.  S.  231.  f.  supposes  the  book  to  consist  of 
independent  poems  connected  either  by  the  author,  or  by  some  other  per- 
son, into  four  books,  with  an  appendix  of  passasfes  which  could  not  well 
be  inserted  in  any  other  place.  Book  1st,  c.  i  — ii.  7.;  Book  2d,  c.  ii.  8 — 
iii.  3.;   Book  3d,  c.  iii   6 — v.  2  ;   Book  4th,  c.  v.  3 — viii.  4.;  Appendix, 

c.  viii.  5 — 14. De  Wette  only  differs  from  Eichhorn  in  considering 

the  collection  as  a  single  work,  with  a  definite  object,  and  an  appendix 
consisting  of  passages  not  well  suited  to  that  object.  See  his  statement 
of  its  component  parts,  Einleit.  '5  276.  anm.  f).     Tr.] 

§  206.      The  subject  contained  in  the  Canticles. 

It  has  long  been  matter  of  discussion,  what  sort  of  love  these 
poems  celebrate.  The  Jews  supposed  it  to  be  the  mutual  love  of 
God  and  the  people  of  Israel ;   the  ancient  Christians,  that  of  Christ 

and  his  Church. This  interpretation  is  founded  on   the  view  in 

which  the  orientals  regard  their  king  (who  among  the  Hebrews  was 
God  and  with  Christians  Messiah  or  Christ,)  as  the  husband  of  the 
people,  and  the  people  as  his  spouse,  and  sometimes  as  his  mother, 
and  sometimes  even  as  a  virgin.  Comp.  Archaeologie  Th.  H.  B.  H. 
§  171.  S.  245 — 248.*  Those  who  adopt  this  mystical  interpretation 
should  be  cautious  not  to  explain  every  circumstance  in  the  poem,  as 
the  older  interpreters  have  done,  and  by  consequence  produced  so  many 
forced  expositions  ;  but,  as  in  parables,  the  principal  points  only  must 
be  regarded  as  significant,  the  rest  serving  merely  to  fill  up  and  orna- 

*  [Upham's  translation,  §  230.     Tr.] 


186  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

ment. But  there  is  nothing  in  the  Canticles  to  support  this  inter- 
pretation, and  the  name  of  God  never  occurs  in  it.[a] 

Others  therefore  have  understood  the  work  as  referring  to  the  love 
of  the  sexes.  The  opinion  of  Theodore  of  Mopsuestia  was  perhaps 
the  very  worst.  He  was  censured  in  the  council  of  Constantinople, 
A.  D.  553,  because  he  rejected  the  Canticles  as  a  disgraceful  book, 
considering  it  no  doubt  as  celebrating  illicit  love.  But  this  is  irrecon- 
cilable with  the  contents.  If  the  author  had  intended  to  convey  ob- 
scene ideas  in  ambigutjus  expressions,  he  would  not  have  introduced 
innocent  lovers  declaring  their  inmost  feelings,  and  even  desiring  their 
attachment  to  be  made  public,  which  is  not  the  manner  of  unchaste 
persons.  The  interpreter,  therefore,  who  perverts  their  meaning, 
should  take  care  lest  perchance  he  betray  his  own  impurity.  The 
whole  poem  may,  without  any  forced  constructions,  be  understood  in 
a  chaste  sense,  as  Dathe  has  shown  in  his  Latin  Version  of  the  Old 
Testament,  Vol.  IV.  p.  418 — 447. 

It  was  the  opinion  of  Bossuet  and  Dupin,  that  the  author  celebrates 
the  marriage  of  Solomon  with  the  daughter  of  the  king  of  Egypt,  [b] 
But  there  is  no  trace  of  a  marriage  in  the  work,[c]  nor  do  the  poems 
seem  to  be  adapted  to  royal  nuptials.  In  this  case  more  allusions  to 
Solomon  and  to  his  Egyptian  consort  might  be  expected,  and  the 
strains  are  too  rural  to  be  the  songs  of  the  royal  court  at  such  a  joyful 
solemnity. 

Others  again  have  maintained  that  the  burden  of  the  poem  is  con- 
jugal love.  But  they  have  not  observed,  that  not  only  in  monogamy, 
but  also  in  polygamy,  it  is  never  so  ardent  as  it  is  here  represented. 
Plurality  of  wives  may  indeed  diminish  affection,  but  it  cannot  increase 
it.  And  it  is  chiefly  worthy  of  observation,  that  in  the  Canticles  not 
the  least  trace  of  an  union  between  the  parties  is  discoverable,  but 
only  the  hope  that  it  will  hereafter  take  place. 

No  other  object  therefore  remains,  but  chaste  and  reciprocal  affec- 
tion of  the  sexes  previously  to  marriage.  Some  of  the  language  may 
be  thought  indecorous  in  persons  in  such  circumstances,  but  this  is  not 
the  case,  unless  it  be  taken  in  the  worst  sense.  It  admits  of  a  mean- 
ing perfectly  chaste  which  in  the  mouths  of  chaste  lovers,  such  as  the 
parties  are  uniformly  represented,  is  the  only  one  that  can  be  true. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  487 

[a)  In  favour  of  this  interpretation,  so  summarily  rejected  by  Jahn, 
are  ranged  the  names  of  Good,  and  Lowth,  and  Horslcy,  and  many  other 
divines  of  the  English  Church.  Horsley's  Sermons,  Serm.  IV.  Vol. 
II.  p.  36.  s.  erf.  ^m.  Comp.  Lowtd,  Praelect.  XXX.  Lectures  on  Heb. 
Poetry,  tr.  Grkgory,  p.  424— 444,  ed.  Boston;  also  Horme,  Introd. 
Vol.  IV.  p.  131  —  135.     Tr.] 

[b)  This  was  also  the  opinion  of  Horsley.  With  him  agree  Calmet, 
Lowth,  Percy,  and  Harmer,  and  many  other  interpreters.  Horne, 
Introd.  IV.  129-     Tr.] 

[c)  Yet  De  Wette  says,  "c.  iii.  6.  must  necessarily  be  taken  as  a. 
bridal  song  of  Solomon's."  Einleit.  }  277.  anm.  b)  and  }  276,  anm. 
g).     Tr.]    ' 

§  207.     The  Canticles  is  a  canonical  book. 

But  it  will  be  said-  '  what  have  amatory  poems  to  do  among  the  sa 

cred  books  V It  will  hardly  be  allowed  by  all  that  the  chaste  love 

of  the  sexes  is  a  subject  worthy  of  sacred  poems  :[a]  I  shall  there- 
fore speak  my  own  sentiments  with  freedom.  1)  The  author  or 
authors  of  these  poems  does  not  celebrate  all  chaste  love  of  the  sexes 
before  marriage  but  that  only  which  leads  to  monogamy,  which  is 
commended  in  Ecclesiastes,  c.  ix.  9.  ;  for  which  puipose  polygamy  is 
indirectly  censured  in  iii.  6 — II.  vi.  8,  9.     In  this  view  these  poems 

might  be  very  useful. 2)  The  prophets,  perhaps  Haggai,  Zecha- 

riah  and  Malachi,  who  numbered  these  poems  among  the  sacred 
books,  seem  to  have  understood  them  in  a  mystical  sense,  so  that  the 
sense  of  the  Canticles,  so  far  as  it  is  a  canonical  book,  is  mystical. 
For,  although  this  sense  may  not  have  been  designed  by  the  author 
or  authors,  yet  by  those  who  introduced  the  book  into  the  canon,  it 
was  the  only  one  that  was  regaj;ded.[6] 

If  these  views  are  correct,  it  will  be  easy  to  repel  the  arguments 
formerly  advanced  against  the  Canticles,  by  some  of  the  Jews  (Pirke 
Aboth.  c.  i.  p.  1,  and  Massechet  Jadaim,  c.  iii.  §  b.),  and  since 
by  some  Christians.  However,  the  Jews  merit  approbation  for 
not  permitting  their  youth  to  read  this  book,  in  which  respect 
both  Origen  (Prsef.  in  Cant.)  and  Jekome  (Prsef.  in  Ezek.)  agrep 
with  them.[c] 


488  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOK 

[a)  EicHHORN,  5  650.,  and  De  Wette,  peremptorily  reject  it  from  the 
Canon.    TV.] 

[&)  This  is  a  very  extraordinary  view  of  this  subject.  It  is  plain  from 
^  206.  that  the  author  considers  this  mystical  sense  as  destitute  of  any 
support  from  the  poem  itself  Does  he  mean  then  that  those  who  intro- 
duced the  book  into  the  Canon  understood  it  in  a  sense  not  intended  by 
the  author  ?     And  if  so,  that  they  were  in  an  error  with   regard   to  its 

meaning"'     In  this  case  he  would  deny  its  canonical  authority. Or, 

does  he  mean  to  say  that  the  book  contains  a  mystical  sense,  unknown  to 
its  author,  as  he  allows  to  be  the  case  with  some  predictions  ?  See  }  82 
of  this  part.  This  will  hardly  be  admitted  by  any  sober  critic,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  conceive  such  to  be  the  author's  opinion.     Tr.] 

[c)  See  the  proofs  of  the  canonical  authority  of  the  Canticles,  in  HoRNE, 
Introd.  IV.  126.  s.     TV.] 

§  208.     Of  the  author  and  age  of  the  Canticles. 

The  title  attributes  the  poerr  to  Solomon.  But  the  language  is  not 
such  as  was  in  use  in  his  time  and  is  observable  in  the  Proverbs,  for 
forms  of  words  and  constructions  occur  which  are  more  modern,  and 
many  Aramaean  terms.     Thus  uhr\2  from  SnD   or  S">3,  is  used  for 

wall  in  c.  ii.  9.,  dt^d  iov  garden  in  iv.  13  [a] 

But  on  the  other  hand  those  who  argue  from  these  circum:- 
stances  that  the  book  of  Canticles  was  written  after  the  Babylonian 
captivity,  do  not  consider  that  those  beautiful  poems  contain  frequent 
allusions  to  the  time  and  circumstances  of  Solomon,  and  that  the 
whole  appearance  of  the  work  is  opposed  to  the  suj'position  of  this 
modern  age.  For  then  Jerusalem  was  not  the  royal  residence,  nor 
were  there  kings  to  whom  maidens  might  be  brought,  nor  soldiers  of 
Solomon,  nor  Pharaohs  reigning  in  Egypt,  nor  a  Tirza,  nor  a  tower 
in  Libanus,  all  which  are  mentioned  in  the  Canticles  as  well-known 
objects.  These  poems  therefore  seem  to  have  been  composed  before 
the  captivity,  perhaps  in  a  late  period  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah.  I 
can  hardly  persuade  myself  that  any  of  them  were  written  by  Solo- 
mon, nor  are  they  all  the  work  of  the  same  author,  for  some  are  much 
more  elegant  than  others. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  4B9 

[a)  EiCHHORN,  Einleit.  S.  218.  adds,  the  frequent   use  of  the  prefix 
B' ;   the  compound  term  HD^St^)  c.  i.  7,  and  others  similar ;    ':)S  for  -f)  ; 

the  orthography  TM  for  nn,  c  iv.  4;  the  construction  rioStyS  Itl'N,  c.  i. 

Land    Tiibhwh^i^,  c.  in.  1.     But  these  Aramseiams  "may  be satifactorily 

accounted  for  when  we  recollect  the  extensive  intercourse  that  existed 
between  Solomon  and  the  neighbouring  nations."  Home,  IV.  129.  They 
are  but  few  in  number,  and  even  of  these,  such  as  relate  merely  to 
spelling  may  have  arisen  in  transcription.  De  Wette  is  of  opinion  that 
the  whole  range  of  the  figures  and  allusions,  and  the  character  of  the 
manners  depicted,  prove  that  this  work  belongs  to  the  age  of  Solomon. 
He  accounts  for  the  later  features  by  supposing  the  several  minor  poems 
to  have  been  collected  at  some  late  period.  Solomon  was  not  the  col- 
lector and  publisher  of  the  collection  ;  comp.  the  title,  and  i.  4,  5,  12.  iii. 
6—11.  vii.  6.  viii.  11,  12. Einleit.  5  277.     7V.1 


62 


■too         FARiJCUf-AR    IN'TBODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOk 


CHAPTER  V. 


OF   ECCLESIASTEg. 


§  S0i5.     Of  the  7iame  Ecclesiastu. 
Tnii  name  of  the  book  is  nSrip,  TcoMeth,  where  the  final  iThau  is 
not  feminine  but  eniphatic,[a]   as  in  many  Arabic  words,  such  as 

'^io^l|    o,  '^('■md  fit  for  burden ;    '^[^  J^     unhappy;     ^.y\ 

a  narrator;  and  others.  This  form  is  to  be  met  with  also  in  nouns 
.which  are  properly  Hebrew,  as  ni3D  and  niDS  in  Ez.  ii.  54,  (55.)  57. 

Neh.  vii.  57,  59.  [J]  Those  who  explain  the  noun  rhr\h  so  as  to  sig- 
nify an  assembly  of  learned  inen  ought  to  affix  to  the  word  the  points 
of  the  abstract  term  nbnp.     But  not  only  are  all  the  ancient  versions 

opposed  to  such  a  sense,  but  also  many  places  in  the  book  itself, 
where  the  Koheleth  always  speaks  as  an  individual  and  not  as  an  as- 
sembly of  persons.  See  i.  1,  12,  In  vii.  27.  the  words  ought  to  be 
ditferently  divided,  so  as  to  read  n'7npn  ION  instead  of  n"7np  nii3N,[c] 

for  it  is  not  a  congregation  but  an  individual  who  is  the  speaker. 
The  name  has  been  rendered  etymologically  by  the  Alexandrine 
translator,  6  exxXi^criag-iis,  the  assembler,  and  this  term  has  been  re- 
tained by  Jerome  in  his  version.  There  is  no  doubt  that  Solomon  is 
the  person  who  is  called  the  Koheleth ;  the  question  is,  whether  the 
name  is  applied  to  him  as  assembhng  the  people  or  as  addressing 
them  when  assembled.  The  contents  of  the  book  are  not  adapted 
to  the  multitude,  and  when  in  xii.  9.  the  Koheleth  is  said  to  tearh 


OF    THE    OLD    TESfAMliNi.  4"9i 

the  people,  the  readers  of  the  work  are  meant ;  just  as  the  propheld 
and  the  Arabians  frequently  apply  the  word  people  in  a  limited 
sense  to  the  bystanders.  Nachtigal*  gives  the  word  n'^np  the  mean- 
ing before  noticed,  of  an  assembly  of  wise  vxen  in  an  academy  or  so- 
ciety. But  the  book  contains  not  the  least  vestige  of  any  such  as*- 
semblage.  The  Koheleth  uniformly  speaks  as  a  single  person,  aud 
when  in  xii.  11.  he  commends  the  sayings  of  the  wise,  he  indirectly 
commends  his  book  itself  which  consists  of  such  sayings.     The  ''bi'2 

Uf iJDX  t  of  xii.  1 1 .  are  not  assemblers  or  assemblies  of  wis-3  men,  but 

collectors  of  wise  sayings  and  reflections  on  the  proper  conduct  of 
life.  Such  a  collector  of  declarations  is  the  author  of  this  work,  and 
this  meaning  of  the  word  nSnp  agrees  exactly  with  the  contents  of 

the  book,  and  is  given  also  by  the  author  himself  in  xii.  9,  I0.[d] 

[a)  It  is  repeatedly  joined  with  masculine  nouns  or  verbs ;  e.  g.  i.  I, 
2,  12.  xii.  8,  9,  10.     TV.] 

[6)  niTsh,  Judg,  iv.  4,    r\^22t5,  H   Sam.  xxi.  8,  niDT,  ni<"tJ;S 

nfDvJ?,  I  Chr.  vii.  8,  and  711300,  Neh.  vii.  7.  are  additional  unesceptioii- 

able  examples  of  feminine  terminations  to  masculine  nouns,  in  these  in- 
stances all  names  of  men.  TV.]  ;■■ 
[c)  So  MiCHAELis,  Suppl.  ad.  Lex.  Heb.  No.  2236.  p.  2168.  Tr.] 
[rf)  The  subject  of  this  section  is  copiously  discussed  by  Holden,  in 
his  learned  Preliminary  Dissertation  to  his  Attempt  to  Illustrate  the 
Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  p.  sxxi — xlvii.  After  stating  and  examining  the 
various  opinions,  he  decides  in  favour  of  that  which  considers  Koheletk 
as  meaning  "  one  who  convenes  the  people  together,  and  imparts  to  theut 
the  lessons  of  wisdom  and  virtue  ;"  and  declares  that  "  upon  the  whole, 
though  '  Preacher'  does  not  quite  express  the  force  of  the  original,  the 
English  language  does  not,  he  thinks,  afford  a  more  appropriate  word." 
p.  xxxix.  MiCHAELis'  interpretation  is  very  little  different,  being  "  qui 
coetui  seu  academise  philosophorum  praeest,  praesidem  ejus  et  doctorem.^' 
Suppl.  p.  2169.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  283.  anm.  a)  agrees  exactly 
with  Holden.  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  {  657,  comes  also  to  the  same  con- 
clusion.    TV.] 

*  [Versammlung  der  Weisen,  1798 — 99,  Halle.] 

t  [Masters  of  assemblies  in  our  translation.    Holdex,  Prel.  Diss,  p.  xlii.  agre'« 
with  Jahn.     Tr.] 


492         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

§  210.     Contents  of  Ecclesiastes. [a] 

The  book  comprises  observations  on  the  attempts  and  eftbrts,  the 
occupations  and  labours,  the  pleasures  and  delights  of  men,  all  of 
which  are  pronounced  to  be  vain,  empty,  fluctuating,  fugitive  and 
painful ;  iv.  4,  8.  vi.  2,  9.  viii.  10,  14.  This  truly  lamentable  condi- 
tion of  mankind,  is  moreover  represented  as  rendered  worse  by  nu- 
merous and  heavy  calamities,  so  that  no  other  benefit  of  life  appears 
to  remain  to  man,  but  to  enjoy  himself,  or,  to  use  the  language  of  the 
author,  to  eat  and  to  drink.  The  reader  is  occasionally  instructed, 
particularly  in  the  latter  chapters,  in  what  way,  notwithstanding  this 
melancholy  state  of  human  things,  he  may  live  a  tranquil  life,  or  at 
least  alleviate  its  troubles.  All  these  observations  relate  to  the  pre- 
sent life  ;  the  author  precludes  himself  from  any  advantage  which  he 
might  have  derived  from  the  prospect  of  a  future,  in  iii.  21. 

[The  author  towards  the  close  of  his  work  gives  particular  direc- 
tions for  a  happy  life,  recommending  principally  practical  rehgion, 
xi.  1 — xii.  7.,  and  concludes  the  book,  agreeably  to  the  eastern  man- 
ner, with  his  subscription  and  a  declaration  of  the  design  which  he 
had  in  view,  namely,  to  teach  the  fear  of  God  or  practical  religion  : 
V.  8—14.] 

[a)  See  the  Analytical  table  of  Contents  prefixed  to  Holder's  At- 
tempt, &c.,  and  the  whole  of  his  Paraphrase.     TV.] 

:§  211.     Arrangement  of  the  Contents. 

In  tlie  beginning  of  the  book  nothing  is  to  be  'found  but  complaints 
respecting  the  vanity  and  vexatiousness  of  human  affairs,  i.  2 — iv.  16; 
afterwards  they  occur  less  frequently,  and  towards  the  end  not  at  all. 
On  the  other  hand,  admonitions  and  instructions  for  a  happy  life  be- 
gin at  iv.  17.  (v.  1.),  afterwards  they  are  oftener  presented,  and  in 
the  end  they  constitute  the  whole  subject.  This  arrangement  of  the 
different  parts  will  not,  however,  justify  the  conclusion  that  two 
speakers  are  introduced,  or  that  tlie  work  contains  two  different  dis- 
courses, [a]  The  complaints,  and  the  instructions  for  a  happy  life, 
agree  in  the  principal  points.  For  as  the  former  begin  the  work  by 
announcing  all  things  as  vain  and  troublesome,  the  latter  conclude  it 
in  tlie  same  way,  and  as  in  the  complaints    ii.  24.  iii.  12,  22.  v.  17. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


49:i 


(IB.)  VI.  3 — 6.,  so  also  in  the  instructions,  xi.  8,  9,  10.  an  enjoyment 
of  life  is  liiglJy  recommended,  as  the  only  certain  gain.  In  only  one 
passage,  vii.  1.  (2.)  ss.,  are  we  taught  the  usefulness  of  the  recollec- 
tion of  death  for  the  proper  regulation  of  life.  These  circumstances 
show  that  it  is  one  person  who  speaks  through  the  whole  book.  But 
remarks  follow  each  other  in  no  other  order  than  that  in  which  they 
occurred  to  the  author,[J]  and  he  appears  to  have  often  allowed  him- 
self a  considerable  intermission  from  his  labours,  and  after  some 
time  to  have  resumed  his  work  ;  and  therefore  the  connexion  is  oc- 
casionally interrupted,  and  chasms  frequently  occur. 

[a)  This  was  the  opinion  of  Herder  in  his  Briefe  das  Studiuin  der 
Theol.  betreffend,  I.  Th.  S.  180.] 

[b)  This  remark  is  too  strong,  and  too  positively  made.  Holden,  in 
his  Attempt  &c.  has  shown  a  very  considerable  degree  of  method  in  the 
work,  and  a  series  of  regular  arguments  throughout  the  whole.     Tr.] 

§212.     Scope  of  the  Work. 

The  author's  frequent  observations  that  a  man  has  nothing  better 
than  to  eat  and  drink,  cannot  afford  reason  to  infer  that  he  intends  to 
recommend  a  life  of  effeminacy  and  ease,  for  he  pronounces  even 
pleasure  joined  with  wisdom  to  be  vain  and  troublesome,  and  he  in- 
culcates virtue  and  religion,  and  requires  his  readers  to  avoid  corrupt 
and  artful  women  as  the  greatest  pest,  all  which  are  at  variance  with 
such  a  design.  On  the  other  hand  his  complaints  of  the  vanity  and 
"vexatiousness  of  human  affairs  do  not  warrant  the  conclusion  that  he 
means  to  represent  this  earth  as  a  valley  of  tears,  and  that  gratifica- 
tions, however,  innocent,  can  have  no  connexion  with  virtue  ;  for  his 
frequent  directions  to  enjoy  life,  yet  in  such  a  way  as  is  consistent 
with  religious  obligations,  are  entirely  opposed  to  such  a  sentiment. 

The  author  does  not  dwell  upon  the  vanity  and  vexatiousness  of 

human  affairs  more  than  upon  an  agreeable  use  of  tlie  pleasures  of 
life,  and  therefore  his  intention  evidently  was  to  repress  the  restless 
and  eager  efforts  of  men,  which  hurry  them  on  in  heaping  up  wealth, 
in  securing  pleasures  and  in  acquiring  honours  ;  and  at  the  same 
time  to  instruct  them  not  to  increase  the  troubles  of  life  by  denying 
themselves  the  enjoyment  of  harmless,  though  uncertain  and  fleeting 


494  PARTiCULAU    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH   BOOIC 

pleasures. A  future  slate  is  asserted  in  xii.  7.,  nor  is  it  <ienied  in 

iii.  21.     The  author  merely  remarks,  that  the  condition  of  man  after 
death  is  not  discoverable  by  human  reason. 

An  impartial  judge  will  hardly  consider  the  author  as  contending 
with  particular  opponents,  Pharisees  for  instance,  or  Greek  so- 
phists, [a]  No  other  opponents  are  found  but  such  as  it  is  his  inten- 
tion to  instruct,  such  as  weak  and  ignorant  persons,  who  fancy  that 
they  are  acting  wisely  when  they  pursue  without  moderation  plea- 
sures, riches,  honours,  and  other  objects  of  various  kinds,  and  even 
wisdom  itself,  or  when  they  give  themselves  up  to  despondency  in 
Calamities,  without  regarding  the  will  of  the  Deitv,  or  seriously  con- 
sidering the  condition  of  man. Men  of  this  character,  whether 

they  be  called  Pharisees  or  vSophists,  are  to  be  met  with  in  every 
age.  [6] 

The  Talmudiats,  in  Shabbath,  p.  60.,  tell  us  that  some  of  the  Jews 
found  fault,  because  the  author  speaks  of  creatures  as  vain,  and  make^ 
contradictory  assertions.  But  these  contradictions  are  not  real.  The 
objectors  did  not  perceive  that  the  arrangement  of  the  book  required  the 
observations  on  the  vanity  and  vexatiousness  of  human  affairs  to  be 
weakened  by  means  of  other  principles. [c]  Some  Christians  are  dis- 
pleased with  the  melancholy  light  in  which  human  affairs  are  repre- 
sented in  the  book.  But  this  objection  amounts  to  nearly  the  same  as 
that  of  the  Jews  just  noticed.  Others  have  taken  umbrage  at  the  fre- 
quent direction  to  enjoy  the  good  things  of  life.  Neither  party  has  re- 
garded the  ultimate  object  to  which  all  the  observations  of  the  author 
are  directed, 

[a]  ZiRKEL  supposes  the  former  to  be  referred  to,  Bergst  the  lat' 
ter.    See  Eichhorn's  Biblioth.  X.  Th.  S.  955—979.] 

[6)  The  reader  will  meet  with  a  more  satisfactory  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject of  this  section  in  Holden's  Prel.  Diss.  &:c.  p.  xlvii — Ixxv.    Tr.] 

[e)  The  author  here  in  a  measure  corrects  himself,  by  allowing  that 
there  is  some,  arrangement  in  the  book.    See  Note  [a]  on  {  211.    TV.] 


§  2 1 3.     Language  and  style  of  Ecclesiastes. 

The  language  of  Ecclesiastes  is  intermingled  with  more  modern 
fend  Aramaean  words  and  forms  of  words  and  ideas,  than  are  to  be 
found  in  any  other  Hebrew  book  :   as  for  instance,  133,  of  old  timp» 


OlP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT,  495 

already,  in  c.  i.  10.  ii,  16.  iii.  15.  iv.  2.  vi.  10.  ix.  6.  5.  ;   |pn,  to  bs^ 

made  straight,  in  c,  i.  15  ;  and  otl]ers,[a]  But  the  Grecisms,  which 
ZiRKEL  thinks  he  has  discovered  in  his  Unterschungen  ueber  den 
Prediger,  S.  4G — 56,  admit  of  a  satisfactory  interpretation  from  tho 
oriental  lang^jages.  See  Jon.  Ernst  Schmidt  Kohelets  Lehren,  1 794. 

S.  283 — 304. The  style  of  the  book  is  feeble  and  approximates 

to  prose,  the  parallelisms  which  belong  to  Hebrew  poetry  being  often 
neglected.  The  connexion  of  discourse  is  continually  broken,  but  in 
the  latter  chapters  it  is  somewhat  more  carefully  preserved.  Several 
expressions  of  considerable  obscurity  occur.  [6] 

[a)  See  more  examples  in   Einleit.  S.  348,  and  especially  in  Eichh. 

Einleit.  {  658.  S.  255.  ff. They  are  examined  and  answered  by  Hoi.- 

»EN,  Prelim.  Diss.  p.  x.  ss.     TrJ] 

[h)  See  more  on  the  subject  of  this  section  in  PIolben.  Prel.  Diss.  p. 

Ixxv — xcviii. Lowth's  opinion  is  as  follows :  "  The  style  of  this  work 

is  singular ;  the  language  is  generally  low,  I  might  almost  call  it  mean  or 
vulgar  [dictio  est  humilis  plerumque  et  submissa,  sed  imprimis  obscura] ; 
it  is  frequently  loose,  unconnected,  approaching  to  the  incorrectness  of  con- 
versatitm  ;  and  possesses  very  little  of  the  poetical  character,  even  in  the 
composition  and  structure  of  the  periods  :  which  peculiarity  may  possibly 
be  accounted  for  from  the  nature  of  the  subject."  Lectures  on  Heb, 
Poistry,  Lect.  XXIV,     Gregort's  Trans,  p.  542.  s.  edBosf.     Tr.} 

* 
§  214.      The  Author  of  Ecclcsiastes. 

It  is  true  indeed  that  Solomon  speaks  in  this  book,  but  he  certatnly 
did  not  v.'rite  it.  A  king  complaining  of  oppressions,  of  unjust  judg- 
ments, of  the  elevation  of  weak  and  ignorant  persons  and  of  servants 
to  dignified  stations,  would  have  condemned  himself  [a]  Solomon 
also  could  not  use  the  language,  /  was  king,  or,  /  am  Jcing  over  Israel 
in  Jerusalem,  c.  i.  12,  a  fact  of  too  much  publicity  to  be  mentioned 
by  him. [A]  The  occurrence  of  Aramjean  and  modern  words,  which 
lias  just  been  stated,  shows  that  the  author  lived  much  later.  In 
'oirder  to  give  weight  to  his  discourse,  he  assumes  the  character  of  the 
vvisest  of  kings.  Who  he  was  it  is  impossible  to  say  ;  only  from  his 
observations  on  the  course  of  human  affairs  it  is  evident,  that  he  was 
oifte  who  had  been  taught  by  his  own  experience  the  vanity  and  vexa- 


49(5  PARTICULAR    lx\TR0DUCT10N  TO    EACH    BOOK 

tiousness  of  all  things  and  the  miseries  and  calamities  of  mankind, 
and  who  felt  in  himself  the  efficacy  of  tliose  counsels  which  he  im- 
parted to  others,  [c] 

[a)  Holden's  answer  to  this  is  satisfactory. Vice,  folly,  oppression, 

and  misery  will  exist,  more  or  less,  even  under  the  best .  -^.ministrations. 
No  wisdom  beingsufficient  to  prevent  these  evils,  the  king  himself  might 
lament  them,  as  well  as  any  of  his  subjects.  He  may  have  referred,  too, 
te  surrounding  states,  and  the  general  course  of  things.  Prel,  Diss.  p. 
XV.  s.     TV.] 

[6)  The  sacred  authors  repeatedly  designate  their  stations  and  employ- 
ments. So  Jer.  i.  1.  Ezek.  i.  3.  Am.  i.  1.  Rom.  i.  1.  I  Cor.  i.  1.  &c.  It 
is  especially  agreeable  to  the  Oriental  style  for  a  king  to  enumerate  his 

names  and  titles  in  any  of  his  productions. There  is  a  peculiar  fitness  in 

the  recommendation  of  a  didactic  treatise  by  the  weight  of  authority,  and 
the  very  next  remark  of  our  author  is  a  confirmation  of  this.  See  Hol- 
der, p.  xvi.  s.      TV.] 

[c)  "  The  acknowledgment  of  numerous  follies  and  delusions  in  this 
work  implies,  that — the  author — had  repented  of  past  misconduct.  The 
frequent  assertion  of  the  emptiness  of  earthly  greatness  ;  the  declarations 
that  human  enjoyments  are  unsatisfactory  ;  the  enumeration  of  gardens, 
edifices,  and  possessions,  requiring  a  long  life  for  their  completion  ;  the 
deep  condemnation  of  former  pursuits ;  the  expression  of  satiety  and  dis- 
gust at  past  pleasures ;  and  the  tone  of  cool  and  philosophical  reflection 
wluch  pervades  the  whole,  are  sti'ikingly  characteristic  of  an  advanced 
period  of  life  ;  and  the  production  of  a  king,  bowed  with  the  infirmities 
of  age,  wearied  with  the  pomp  of  royalty^ sated  with  luxury,  humbled 
with  a  sense  of  past  guilt,  and  prostrate  in  penitence,"  appears  upon  every 
line.'  Comp.  HoLDE^,  Prel.  Diss.  p.  viii. The  contents  of  this  sec- 
tion, and  the  other  objections  against  the  authorship  of  Solomon,  are  an- 
swered in  detail  by  Holden,  Prel.  Diss.  p.  iii — xxvi.     Tr.] 

§  215.     Age  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes . 

If  this  book  had  been  written  in  the  time  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes- 
against  the  tenets  of  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  as  Zirkel  sup- 
poses, it  would  be  impossible  to  account  for  its  having  crept  into  the 
canon,  while  the  Wisdom  of  the  son  of  Sirach,  and  the  first  book  of 

Maccabees  were  excluded. And  as  no  other  sophists  are  attacked 

in  this  work,  but  such  as  every  age  produces,  there  is  no  reason  with 
Bergst  to  place  it  m  the  age  of  Alexander.     The  argument  founded 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  49  7 

on  the  absence  of  the  name  Jehovah,  ^[supposing  this  to  have  arisen 
from  the  fact  that  the  work  was  composed  after  the  period  when  the 
use  of  that  name  was  interdicted,  has  no  bearing  on  the  subject,  for 
this  prohibition  extended  no  further  than  the  pronunciation  ;  and  the 
written  term  very  frequently  occurs  in  the  Chaldee  Paraphrases 
which  are  much  more  modern. Neither  do  the  Aramaean  and  mo- 
dern words  which  are  found  in  it  provejt  to  have  been  composed 
after  the  captivity :  for  Haggai,  Zechariah,  Ezra,  Malachi,  and  Nehe- 
miah,  write  in  purer  Hebrew,  and  on  the  contrary  the  author  of  the 
Canticles,  who  lived  before  the  captivity,  intermingles  Chaldee  words 
with  Hebrew.  The  frequent  inculcation  of  obedience  to  kings,  even 
if  they  are  unjust,  cruel,  and  weak,  or  neglect  the  wealthy  and  noble, 
and  advance  servants  and  fools,  (see  viii.  2.  x.  4 — 15,  16,20.  comp. 
also  iv.  13 — 17,)  is  not  in  character  with  the  times  after  the  captivity. 
Admonitions  of  this  kind  presume  an  age  when  the  Hebrews  had  their 
own  kings,  and  are  inconsistent  with  that  subsequent  to  the  captivity, 
when  they  were  subjected  to  foreign  governments  of  immense  power, 
against  which  they  had  neither  the  ability  nor  the  inclination  to  form 

plots,  as  the  history  of  this  period  uniformly  attests  their  fidelity. 

The  book  therefore  appears  to  have  been  written  in  the  latter  years 
of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  between  the  time  of  Manasseh,  and  that  of 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  Perhaps,  however,  some  indications 
may  be  found  of  the  author's  living  in  the  kingdom  of  Israel,  which 
was  disturbed  by  numerous  tumults  and  seditions,  and  where,  from 
the  vicinity  of  Syria,  the  language  might  be  earlier  corrupted  by  the 
introduction  of  Aramaean  expressions. [o] 

[a)  It  will  be  observed  that  the  arguments  produced  by  the  author  in 
this  section  merely  show  that  the  book  could  not  have  been  composed 
later  than  a  certain  period.  Whether  it  was  composed  earlier  will  de- 
pend upon  the  result  of  the  examination  of  the  preceding  section.     Ta] 


tJ3 


49H     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


SECTION  IV. 


on  the  deuterocanonical  writings, 
[or  the  apocrypha.] 


§  216.     Difficulties  in  the  Deuterocanonical  writings. 

The  difficulties  occurring  in  the  Deuterocanonical  writings  have 
been  solemnly  acknowledged  by  our  church,  in  her  separation  of 
them  from  the  protocanonical  books,  and  formation  of  a  second 
canon.  Comp.  Part  I.  §  29  and  36.  The  distinction  between  the 
two  classes  of  sacred  books  consists  in  this  very  fact,  that  those 
called  deuterocanonical  are  encumbered  with  difficulties  which  are 
not  so  easy  of  solution  as  those  in  the  protocanonical,  and  have 
therefore  induced  not  a  few  of  the  ancients  to  consider  the  books  in 
wliich  they  occur  as  of  doubtful  authority,  or  even  entirely  to  reject 
them.  These  difficulties,  indeed,  are  not  so  great  as  they  were  for- 
merly represented  by  the  adversaries  of  the  books  ;  for  many  of  the 
objections  were  far-fetched  and  forced,  many  others  were  grounded 
on  erroneous  views,  and  many  were  built  on  hypotheses  ;  yet  the 
answers  of  our  writers*  were,  in  not  a  few  instances,  unsound  and 
weak.     Both  of  the  conflicting  parties  were  deficient  in  accurate 

acquaintance  with  the  oriental  languages  and  antiquities. After 

all,  difficulties  by  no  means  trivial  still  remain.  We  will  examine 
how  these  may  be  most  conveniently  removed  ;  and  if  it  should  be 
found  impossible  to  give  solutions  altogether  satisfactory,  still  our 
opinion  respecting  the  books'  themselves  will  not  be  affected,  as  we 
acknowledge  the  fact  when  we  place  them  in  the  second  canon. 

*  [Those  of  the  Romish  Church.     IV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  499 


CHAPTER  I. 


OP    THE    BOOK    OP    BARUCH. 


§  217.     Barnch,  and  the  time  in  whicli  he  lived. 

Baritch  is  said  to  be  the  son  of  Neriah,  the  son  of  Maasaia,  (or 
Maasiah,)  the  son  of  Zedekiah,  the  son  of  Asadiah,  (or  Sedei,)  the 
son  of  Chelkiah,  who  seems  to  have  been  a  man  of  some  note,  but 
not  the  Hilkiah  who  found  the  ancient  copy  of  the  law  in  the  reign 
of  Josiah.  Whether  tlie  Baruch  wlio  wrote  this  book  was  the  Ba- 
ruch  who  acted  as  scribe  for  Jeremiah,  and  who  was  also  the  son  of 
a  man  named  Neriah,  admits  of  doubt.  The  circumstance,  being 
worthy  of  remark,  would  have  been  noticed  in  the  title  of  the  book, 
which  is  somewhat  prolij^,  whereas  no  mention  of  it  occurs  there. 
Besides,  the  secretary  of  Jeremiah  went  with  that  prophet  into 
Egypt  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Jer.  xliii.  6.,  while  the 
author  of  this  book  lived  in  Babylonia  in  the  fifth  year  after  that 
event.  This,  however,  may  be  explained  by  supposing  Baruch 
to  have  removed  from  Egypt  to  Babylon  immediately  after  the  death 

of  Jeremiah. Eichhoriv,  Einleit.   in  die  Apocryph.   Biich.  des 

A.  T.,  S.  377.  f.,  considers  'the  fifth  year'  mentioned  Bar.  i.  1.,  as 
referring  to  the  fifth  year  from  the  captivity  of  Jechoniah.  But  this 
is  contradicted  by  Bar,  i.  2.,  where  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  is 
spoken  of  as  having  already  taken  place  ;  and  no  Jew  can  be  sup- 
posed so  ignorant  of  the  history  of  his  own  nation,  as  not  to  know 
the  difference  between  the  captivity  of  Jechoniah  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem.  [«] 


500    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[a)  The  original  date  is  £V  rw  STSi  TW  •KSfi.'jeTU,  £v  s§Oo(X7)  Ti'  (J-'Ovof. 
£v  7(f)  xaipu),  w  £Xa§ov  oi  XaXSaioJ  tov  Us^outfaXTi/x,  Xj  svs'n'pyio'av 
auTriv  ev  ffupi.  It  seems  difficult  to  understand  this  as  referring  to  more 
than  a  single  date,  namely,  that  in  which  Jerusalem  was  destroyed.  If 
we  compare  it  with  II  Ki.  xxv.  8.  s.  it  will  appear  probable  that  the  in- 
tention of  the  writer  was  to  place  the  date  of  Baruch's  letter  at  the  very 
time  of  the  burning  of  Jerusalem.  De  Wette  accounts  for  the  insertion  of 
STSi  in  the  place  of  fX^lvi,  by  supposing  a  mistake  or  hasty  correction  of 
some  early  transcriber.  Certainly  the  mention  of  ike  year  and  of  the 
day  of  the  month,  which  is  made  by  the  present  reading,  without  any 

notice  of  the  month,  is  both  extraordinary  and  absurd. De  Wette 

considers  it  as  certain  that  the  Baruch  referred  to  in  c.  i.  1.,  is  intended 
for  Baruch  the  scribe  of  Jeremiah.  Indeed  the  similarity  in  the  father's 
name  in  both  instances,  seems  to  favour  that  conclusion.  Comp.  also 
Jer.  li.  59.,  to  which  the  genealogy,  Bar.  i.  1.,  seems  to  refer,  although 
incorrectly.     TV-.] 

§  218.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Baruch. 

I.  The  Prologue  or  Preface  informs  us  that  Baruch  in  the  fifth 
year  after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  read  his  book  to  king  Jecho- 
niah  and  the  people,  in  Babylonia,  by  the  river  Sud  or  Sodi,  and  that 
the  people  were  by  it  brought  to  repentance,  and  sent  the  book,  with 
a  letter  and  presents,  to  Jerusalem,  c.  i.  1 — iii.  8. [a] 

II.  This  is  followed  by  the  book  itself,  iii.  9 — v.  9.  It  contains  in 
the  first  place  an  exhortation  to  wisdom  and  a  due  observance  of  the 
law,  iii.  9 — iv.  8.  Then  it  introduces  the  city  of  Jerusalem  as  a 
widow,  comforting  herself  and  her  children  with  the  hope  of  a  re- 
turn, iv.  9 — 29.  An  answer  follows,  in  confinnation  of  this  hope, 
iv.  30— V.  9. 

III.  A  letter  succeeds,  attributed  to  Jeremiah,  in  which  the  vanity 
of  idols  is  made  manifest,  and  the  exiles  in  Babylon  are  warned  to 
keep  themselves  from  idolatry,  c.  vi. 

[a)  The  letter  commences,  i.  10.  Its  close  is  not  so  certain,  although 
that  mentioned  by  Jahn  is  as  probable  as  any.  De  Wette  places  it  at 
i.  15.  Einleit.  J  322.  anm.  d).     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAIVIENT.  501 


§  219.     Difficulties  in  the  Book  of  Baruch. 

The  sending  of  presents  by  the  exiles  to  Jerusalem,  i.  7.,  whicii 
city  is  mentioned  as  burned  down  and  destroyed,  i.  2,  creates  no  dif- 
ficulty, as  we  find  in  Jer.  xli.  5.  eighty  Jews  represented  as  bringing 
gifts  to  the  ruined  city.  Sacrifices  were  sometimes  offered  even 
among  the  ruins,  until  in  the  23d  year  of  Nebuchadnezzar  this  cus- 
tom was  stopped  by  the  deportation  of  all  the  remaining  Jews,  Jer. 
lii.  30.  As  this  did  not  happen  until  the  same  fifth  year  after  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem  in  which  the  sending  of  the  presents  took 
place,  the  cessation  of  offerings  was  as  yet  unknown  to  the  exiles  in 
Babylon. There  is  scarcely  any  greater  difficulty  in  the  state- 
ment, c.  i.  8,  tTiat  the  high-priest  Joachim  had  received  certain  silver 
vessels  made  by  order  of  king  Zedekiah  ;  for  the  Jews  in  Babylon 
might  be  able  to  redeem  some  of  the  sacred  vessels.  It  cannot  be 
objected  that  the  high-priest  at  that  time  was  not  Joachim  but  Se- 
raiah  ;  for  Seraiah  was  slain  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  Jer. 
lii.  24,  27.,  and  the  remnant  of  the  Jews  in  Judea  may  have  consi- 
dered Joachim,  some  priest  of  high  standing,  as  high-priest. A 

more  important  difficulty  than  the  preceding,  is  presented  by  the 
mention  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and  his  son  Balthasar,  i.  11.,  when  Evil- 
merodach,  and  not  Balthasar  (Belshazzar)  succeeded  Nebuchadnez- 
zar. It  may  be  answered  that  the  name  Balthasar  is  an  interpola- 
tion, or  that  it  was  a  title  of  any  son  that  was  heir  apparent  to  the 
crown,  or  that  Evilmerodach,  like  many  other  oriental  princes,  had 

more  than  a  single  name. The  passages  i.  15.  ss.  ii.  7,  11,  15, 

19.  which  are  thought  to  be  taken  from  Dan.  ix.  7.  ss.,  13,  5,  15, 19, 
and  18,  were  perhaps  forms  of  prayer  in  common  use,  which  there 

would  have  been  no  occasion  to  borrow  from  any  other  book. 

The  river  Sud  or  Sodi,  i.  4,  is  the  Euphrates,  so  called  because  not 
only  the  inhabitants  of  the  district  round  Kufa  and  Bassora,  but  also 

those  of  all  the  villages  in  Babylonia,  call  it  in  Arabic  jj  [  ^^^^ 

Suwad,  as  appears  from  the  Moslemic  Annals  of  Abulfeda.[a] 


.')02  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

Melchior  Canus,  de  Locis  Theol.  II.  c,  9.  p.  27.  ed  Venel.  176J*. 
says,  "  To  reject  the  book  of  Barnch  from  the  canon  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, is  not  only  rash,  but  erroneous.  I  call  it  erroneous  (which  is  a 
word  of  various  and  ambiguous  meaning)  because,  although  near  to  lie- 
resj/,  I  dare  not  call  it  heretical."* 

[This  quotation  illustrates  the  extreme  unwillingness  of  Jahn  to  admit 
the  authority  of  the  apocryphal  books.  His  submission  to  the  dictates  of 
his  church  extorted  an  acknowledgment  of  their  empty  title  as  deulcro- 
canonical ;  but  on  every  occasion  he  shows  his  conviction  of  their  inferi- 
ority to  what  Protestants  rightly  consider  the  only  genuine  Scrip- 
tures.    Tr.] 

\a)  De  Wettk,  Einleit.  {  323.  adds,  as  evidence  of  the  spuriousness 
of  the  book,  the  contradiction  between  c.  i.  1.  as  interpreted  by  him,  and 
the  history  of  Baruch,  Jer.  xliii.  6. ;  the  mention  of  the  altar  i.  10.  and  of 
the  house  of  God,  v.  14 ;  (but  if  the  preceding  objection  applies,  these  do 
not ;)  the  contradiction  between  i.  3.  and  II  Ki.  xxv.  27  ;  and  that  be- 
tween i.  7.  and  I  Chron.  v.  36.  (vi.  10),  II  Ki.  xxv.  18.  Jer,  xxix.  25. 
Comp.  also  i.  9.  with  the  LXX.  of  Jer.  xxiv.  1.  from  which  it  is  evidently 
copied.     TV.] 

§  220.     Language  of  the  Book  of  Baruch. 

There  is  no  mention  made  by  the  ancients  of  any  Hebrew  copy  of 
Baruch.  The  Hebraisms  of  the  Greek  text  might  originate  with  a 
Jew  writing  Greek.  It  can  by  no  means  be  inferred  from  the  ex- 
pression 'Toirjfl'aTS  (Xttvva,  prepare  (or  7nake)  ye  manna-,  i.  10,  that  the 
text  was  originally  Hebrew;  for  the  Alexandrine  translation  has  ren- 
dered nnJD  in  Jer.  xli.  5,  by  /xawa,  so  that  jxavva  might  be  used  in 

Jewish  Greek  to  express  nnJD,  as  it  is  explained  by  Suidas  ;   comp. 

SuiDX  et  PiiAVORiNi  Glossse  Sacrae  ex  ed.  Ernesti,  p.  86.  Yet  as 
there  are  not  any  orations  inserted  in  Baruch,  after  the  Grecian  cus- 
tom, as  there  are  in  the  book  of  Judith,  although  there  was  a  very  fit 
opportunity  for  so  doing,  the  book  seems  not  to  belong  to  the  modern 
age,  in  which  the  Jews  were  accustomed  to  write  in  Greek.  This, 
connected  with  the  circumstance  of  the  occtu-rence  of  the  word  fji-avva, 

*  ["  Baruch  a  canone  sanctanun  scripturarum  eximere,  non  solum  temerarlura,  sed 
etiam  erroneum  est.  Erroneum  vero  hie  appello,  (quia  varia  et  ambigua  est  liujus 
norainis  significatio,)  id,  quod  haeresi  proximum,  haeresim  non  andeo  vocare." 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  503 

and  with  the  frequent  Hebraisms,  renders  the  opinion  of  those  who 
suppose  it  to  have  been  written  in   Hebrew,  rather  probable  than 

otherwise. But  if  the  Greek  text  were  allowed  to  be  the  original, 

the  book  must  have  been  written  under  Ptolemy  Lagus,  or  Philadel- 
phus,  and  the  author  must  have  attributed  his  own  ideas  to  Baruch 
the  scribe  of  Jeremiah,  and  represented  the  latter  as  writing  in  Ba- 
bylonia, in  order  the  more  effectually  to  confirm  the  numerous  body 
of  Jews  then  residing  in  Egypt,  in  the  religion  of  their  forefathers. 
That  the  book  must  have  been  useful  at  that  time  any  one  will  readily 
allow,  although  it  is  not  evident  why  the  author  should  speak  of  the 
return  from  Babylon. 

§  221.     Of  theJBpistle  which  is  contained  in  c.  vi.  of  the  Boole 
of  Baruch. 

The  epistle  in  c.  vi.,  attributed  to  Jeremiah,  is  an  imitation  of  the 
letter  of  that  prophet  in  Jer.  xxix,  so  constructed  as  to  purport  to 
have  been  written  to  the  Jews  who  had  been  carried  away  to  Baby- 
lon after  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem.  It  is  not  a  part  of  the  book, 
as  even  the  difference  of  the  style  attests  ;  nor  was  it  written  by  Je- 
remiah, who  constantly  limits  the  time  of  the  captivity  to  seventy 
years,  whereas  the  author  of  this  letter,  probably  with  reference  to 
the  exiles  of  the  ten  tribes,  extends  it  to  seven  generations,  and  thus 
to  a  period  of  233  years.  Besides,  it  is  written  in  Greek,  and  there 
are  no  observable  traces  of  any  original  Hebrew  text ;  for  what 
Bendtsen  has  remarked  to  the  contrary,  in  his  Exercitationes  Criti- 
cae,  1788,  is  not  satisfactory.  Even  the  method  of  reasoning  mani- 
fests Grecian  learning,  and  a  Grecian  Jew  or  Hellenistic  author.  It 
was,  nevertheless,  the  writer's  intention  to  represent  Jeremiah  as  the 
author  of  the  epistle,  unless  the  title  has  been  erroneously  added  by 

some  other  hand. The  age  of  the  epistle  cannot  be  determined. 

It  is  only  certain  that  it  was  written  before  the  second  book  of  Mac- 
cabees, comp.  II  Mac.  ii.  2.  with  Bar.  vi.  4. 


504  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  222.     Versions  of  the  Booh  of  Baruch. 

There  are  two  ancient  Latin  versions  of  this  book,  the  one  in  the 
Vulgate,  the  other  pabhshed  by  Joseph  Maria  a  Caro  at  Rome  in 
1688.     Both  are  older  than  the  time  of  Jerome,  who  did  not  translate 

the  book  of  Baruch. An  Arabic  and  a  Syriac  version  have  been 

printed  in  the  London  Polyglot,  and  the  Paris  Polyglot  contains  an- 
other Syriac  version,  which  differs  in  many  places  from  the  present 
text.  All  these  versions  have  been  made  from  the  Greek.  Their 
respective  ages  are  unknown. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  505 


CHAPTER  II. 


ON    THE    DEUTEROCANO:!fICAL   PARTS   OF   THE   BOOK   OF    DAKIEl. 


§  223.      The  Song  of  the  Three  Children. 

The  Alexandrine  version  of  Daniel  contains,  c.  iii.  24 — 90,  a  pro- 
lix exhortation  to  all  creatures  to  join  in  the  praise  of  God,  sung  by 
the  three  Jews,  Azarias,  Mishael,  and  Hananiah,  the  friends  of 
Daniel,  when  cast  into  the  fiery  furnace.  Jeeojie,  Pra;f.  in  Dan., 
writes  of  a  certain  Jew,  that  "  he  raised  cavils  at  the  leisure  which 
the  three  children  were  supposed  to  have  to  make  vei-ses  in  the 
burning  furnace,  and  to  call  upon  all  the  elements  in  regular  order 
to  praise  God."  The  whole  of  this  difficulty,  be  it  more  or  less,  will 
vanish,  if  we  suppose  that  some  pious  writer  of  a  later  age  has 
represented  these  men  as  singing,  for  the  purpose  of  celebrating 
their  preservation  in  the  fire. 

6  224.    Language  of  the  So7ig  of  the  Three  Children. 

This  song  shows  some  vestiges  of  an  original  Hebrew  or  Chaldee 
text ;  for  instance,  v.  34.  avos'aTai,  answering  to  nniD,  (or  pmn) 

apostates,  which  means  in  Syriac  cruel  persons,  and  must  have  that 
signification  in  this  passage  ;  so  also  v.  37.  and  40  [a]  Some  writers 
do  not  think  these  grounds  sufficient  to  justify  the  conclusion  that  the 
song  was  originally  written  in  Hebrew,  because  Theodotion  did  not 
translate  it  from  the  Hebrew,  but  merely  copied  it  from  the  Alexan- 
drine version.     But  Theodotion  frequently  differs  from  the  Aleicaii- 

G4 


506  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

tlrine  text,  so  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  copied  the  Alexandrine 

version,  or  translated  from  a  Hebrew  text. Our  Latin  version* 

was  translated  from  the  Greek  text  by  Jerome. 

[a)  De  Wette  considers  these  instances,  and  others  which  he  adds 
from  V.  44,48,  51,  and  65,  as  proofs  of  the  existence  of  an  original  Chal- 
dee  text.     See  Einleit.  J  258.  anin.  b).     Tr.] 

§  225.     The  History  of  Susannah,  Dan.  xiii. 

Susannah,  the  wife  of  a  rich  Jew  of  Babylon,  is  solicited,  while  in 
a  garden,  by  two  Jewish  judges  to  commit  adultery,  and  although 
she  foresees  that  they  will  meditate  revenge,  is  induced  by  her  reli- 
gious principles  to  repel  their  attempt.  The  judges  or  elders,  enra- 
ged at  the  repulse,  call  Susannah  before  a  public  assembly,  and  tes- 
tify that  they  had  caught  her  in  the  act  of  adultery  in  the  garden,  and 
condemn  her  to  death  for  the  offence.  As  the  innocent  victim  is 
on  the  way  to  execution,  Daniel,  who  seems  to  have  had  a  knowledge 
of  the  character  of  these  wicked  judges  from  some  extraneous 
source,  induces  the  people  to  institute  a  fresh  examination  of  the 
evidence  against  her.  He  interrogates  the  elders  separately,  under 
what  tree,  or  in  what  part  of  the  garden  they  had  found  the  supposed 
adulteress  ?  The  first  answering  that  it  was  under  a  mastich  or  len- 
tisk  tree,t  u-ro  rfj^ivov,  Daniel  instantly  pronounces  his  sentence  in  the 
words,  *o  ayyeXog  xupis  o'pfio'ei  tfs  t'/|v  4'U5fT)v  rfTjjaspov,!  '  the  angel  of 
God  hath  received  the  sentence  of  God,  to  cut  thee  in  two.'  The 
other  answering  that  it  was  under  an  ilex  tree,  v'h'o  -irpivov,  he  con- 
demns him  by  saying,  vuv  o  ayysXoe  xupiou  t»]v  pojui.(paiav  sg'vtxsv  sj^wv — iv« 
xuTaif^idYi  (r£,§  >'  the  angel  of  the  Lokd  waiteth  with  the  sword  to  cut 

*  [The  Vulgate.     Tr.] 

t  [The  Latin  of  our  author,  by  a  strange  mistake,  has  ilex  here,  and  lentiseus  after 
■rpivov.     The  German  has  tfj^ivoj,  Mastixbaume,  and  *pivoff,  Steineiche.     Tr.] 

t  [Or  rather,  r)5r)  ya^  ayysXog  rou  ©Sou  Xa§wv  (patfiv  "TTa^a  m  ©Sou,  (fX'<fst 
ds  (AStfov,  MS.  Al.;  or,  rjSr)  yct^  ayysXos  (parfiv  ©sou  Xa§«v  ira^tx,  tou  ©sou. 
rf^irfSi  as  (AStfov,  MS.  Vat.     Tr.] 

§  [Or  as  MS.  Al.  6  ayysXoff  tou  ©sou,  rvjv  po/Xfpaiav  sj(wv  "ffpitfai  ffs 
astfov.    Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMKNT.  507 

thee  in  two.'  The  people  confirm  the  sentence  of  Daniel,  and  these 
false  witnesses,  who  had  been  at  once  accusers  and  judgesj  are  exe- 
cuted in  conformity  with  the  law  of  retaliation. 

§  226.     Dijiadtles  in  this  history. 

Jerome  says  of  this  history,  Pra3f.  in  Dan.:  ''  I  have  heard  one  of 
the  Jewish  teachers,  deriding  the  history  of  Susannah,  and  asserting 
it  to  be  the  forgery  of  some  unknown  Greek,  make  the  same  objec- 
tion that  was  made  to  Origen  by  Africanus,  namely,  that  the  etymo- 
logical allusions  between  rfp^ivog  and  tfj^irfai,  and  ■jrpivog  and  ^^itfai  were 
derived  from  the  Greek  language.  This  objection  may  be  rendered 
intelligible  to  those  acquainted  only  with  the  Latin  language,  by  sup- 
posing that  from  the  answer  of  the  one  elder  '  under  an  ilex  tree,' 
sub  ILICE;  Daniel  had  taken  occasion  to  say  to  him  illico  pereas, 
and  that  to  the  answer  of  the  other,  '  under  a  lentisk  tree,'  sub  lek- 
Tisco,  the  reply  had  been,  in  lente  te  comminuat  angelus,  or  non 
LENTE  pereas,  or  lentus,  that  is,  jlexibilis,  ducaris  ad  mortem.'^* 
Tliis  paronomasia,  which  is  not  only  unforced  and  natural,  but  is 
moreover  intimately  connected  with  the  principal  point  of  the  his- 
tory, could  not  have  occurred  either  in  Hebrew  or  Chaldee,  one  of 
which  languages  Daniel  must  have  used.  Besides,  there  is  no  trace 
of  either  of  these  languages  in  any  part  of  the  narrative.  It  must 
therefore  have  been  written  in  Greek,  and  cannot  be  the  work  of 
Daniel.  The  tumultuary  judgment  given  by  the  elders,  and  by  Da- 
niel himself,  moreover,  is  entirely  at  variance  with  the  forms  of  judi- 
cial proceedings  among  the  orientals  ;  not  to  say,  that  the  captive 
Jews  did  not  possess  the  power  of  life  and  death. These  difficul- 
ties, not  to  mention  others  which  occur,  have  induced  Labiv,  Appa- 
rat.  Bibl.  p.  336.,  to  express  himself  as  follows :  "  The  history  of 

*  ["  Audivi  ego  queini)iam  de  praeceptoribus  Judaeorum,  cum  Susanuae  deriderit 
historiam,  et  a  Graeco,  nescio  quo,  earn  diceret  esse  eoufictam,  illud  opponere,  quod 
Origeni  quoque  opposuit  Africanus,  etymologias  has,  a*o  Tou  ffj^ivou  Cpfirfai,  xai 
aifo  TOU  -ffpivou  •TTpKJ'ai,  de  Graeco  sermone  descendere.  Cujus  rei  intelligentiam 
nostris  banc  possumus  dare,  ut  verbi  gratia  dicamus,  de  arbore  ilice  dixisse  illuin  : 
illico  pereas  ;  et  a  lentisco :  in  lente  te  comminuat  angelus,  vel  non  lente  pereas,  ant 

lentus,  id  est,  flexibilis,  ducaris  ad  mortem." It  will  be  perceived  that  the  text  is 

a  free  translation.     Tr.] 


508         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

Susannah,  although  of  uncertain  authority,  is  an  example  of  admira- 
ble chastity  :  from  the  letter  of  Julius  Africanus  to  Origen,  and  the 
reply  of  Origen,  we  learn,  that  it  has  been  held  by  some  to  be  true, 

by  others  to  be  false." The  readiest  solution  of  these  difficulties 

would  be,  to  suppose  the  whole  narrative  a  parable,  intended  by  the 
author  to  teach  us,  that  old  men  are  not  always  to  receive  irapUcit 
confidence,  and  that  young  men  of  wisdom,  piety,  and  uprightness, 
are  worthy  of  more  deference  than  those  advanced  in  age.  if  irreli- 
gious and  wicked.  This  is  expressly  noticed,  as  the  result  of  the 
narrative,  in  the  Alexandrine  MS.,  at  the  end. Perhaps  some- 
thing similar  had  happened  among  the  Jews  at  a  late  period,  from 
which  the  author  took  occasion  to  write  this  parable. 

§  227.     Versions  of  the  History  of  Susannah. 

The  text  of  Theodotion  is  not  a  distinct  version  from  the  Alexan- 
drine, and  yet  it  differs  from  the  text  of  the  latter  in  many  places,  as 
if  Theodotion  had  corrected  some  things,  with  the  view  of  removing 
difficulties.  From  this  text  of  Theodotion  three  Syriac  versions 
and  one  Arabic  have  been  made.  The  latter,  with  two  of  the  Syriac 
versions,  (one  by  an  unknown  author,  the  other  by  the  bishop  of  He- 
raclea,  A.  D.  613.,)  are  contained  in  the  London  Polyglot.  In  both 
these  Syriac  versions  the  text  is  continually  altered.  The  third  Sy- 
riac version  is  by  Jacob  of  Edessa,  and  has  not  been  printed.  Bugati 
has  given  a  specimen  of  it  in  his  notes  to  the  Syriac  Hexaplar  ver- 
sion of  Daniel.  The  Vulgate  version  of  this  history  was  made  by 
Jerome  from  the  text  of  Theodotion. 

§  228.     The  History  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon. 

The  narrative  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon,  Dan.  xiv.,  is  in  the  Alexan- 
drine text  ascribed  to  Kabakkuk  ;  but  in  the  text  of  Theodotion,  xiii. 
65,  the  transaction  is  placed  in  the  time  of  Cyrus.*  According  to 
the  Alexandrine  text,  which  is  the  most  ancient,  the  narrative  is  as 
follows. Daniel,  on  being  invited  by  the  king  of  Babylon  to  wor- 
ship the  idol  Bel,  pledges  himself  to  prove  tliat  the  idol  does  not  cou- 

*  [See  Daniel  sec.  Septuaginta.  Romse,  1772,  p.  29S,  299.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  «)09 

suine  the  food  which  is  daily  set  before  him  in  large  quantities.  With 
this  view,  as  soon  as  the  food  has  been  deposited,  he  orders  every  one 
to  depart  from  the  temple,  find  sprinkles  the  pavement  with  ashes, 
shuts  the  door,  and  seals  it  with  the  royal  signet.  Early  in  the  morn- 
ing the  king  and  Daniel  open  the  doors,  and  enter  the  temple.  They 
find  the  food  consumed,  it  is  true,  but  at  the  same  time  discover 
in  the  ashes  on  the  pavement  the  footsteps  of  the  priests  and  of  their 
wives  and  children,  who  had  entered  the  temple  at  night  by  a  secret 
door,  and  devoured  the  food.  On  this  account  the  king  orders  the 
idol  Bel,  which  was  made  of  earthenware  overlaid  with  gold,  to  be 

broken  in  pieces. Daniel,  again  importuned  by  the  king  to  adore  a 

dragon,  who  is  represented  as  an  object  of  worship  at  Babylon,  rephes 
that  he  will  undertake,  unarmed,  to  destroy  this  supposed  terrible 
deity.  With  the  king's  permission,  he  offers  the  dragon  food  prepared 
of  a  compound  of  30  minae  of  pitch,  and  of  fat,  and  hair,  which  the 

dragon  devours,  and  immediately  bursts  asunder. The  populace 

are  excited  by  these  outrages  upon  their  gods,  and  rising  tumultu- 
ously,  force  the  king  to  give  up  Daniel.  The  seditious  multitude  hav- 
ing cast  him  into  the  den  of  lions  he  nevertheless  remains  unhurt,  and 
on  the  sixth  day  receives  food  from  Habakkuk,  who,  as  he  was  carry- 
ing dinner  to  his  reapers,  had  been  seized  by  the  hair  by  an  angel, 
and  thus  transported  through  the  air  to  Daniel,  and  who  is  the  same 
day  carried  back  to  Judea  by  the  same  mode  of  conveyance.  The 
king,  at  last,  finding  Daniel  unhurt,  orders  him  to  be  taken  out  of  the 
den,  and  his  persecutors  to  be  cast  to  the  lions. 

§  229.    Difficulties  in  the  narrative  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon. 

Jerome,  Prsef.  in  Dan.,  says,  that  the  Jewish  teacher  already  men- 
tioned made  objections  to  this  narrative  also,  asking  "  what  miracle  or 
sign  of  divine  inspiradon  it  contained  ?  and  whether  the  destruction 
of  the  dragon  with  balls  of  pitch,  or  the  detection  of  the  priests  of 
Bel  by  a  stratagem,  were  performed  by  a  prophetic  spirit  ?  When  he 
came  to  the  part  relatmg  to  Habakkuk,  and  read  about  the  Jew  who 
was  carrying  the  dinner  being  borne  away  into  Chaldea,  he  asked, 
what  instance  could  be  produced  within  the  compass  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, of  any  of  the  saints  having  flown  in  his  cumbrous  body,  and 


.510  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

liaving  in  a  moment  passed  over  so  great  an  extent  of  country  ?  and 
when  one  of  our  religion,  rather  too  ready  to  speak,  had  cited  Ezekiel 
as  an  instance,  and  had  said  that  he  was  carried  from  Chaldea  to  Je- 
rusalem, he  ridiculed  the  man,  and  proved  from  the  book  itself,  that 
Ezekiel  being  in  the  Spirit,  seemed  to  himself  to  be  transported  thi- 
ther. He  moreover  alleged  that  our  Apostle,  being  a  learned  man, 
and  having  learned  the  law  from  the  Hebrews,  had  not  ventured  to 
affirm  that  he  had  been  translated  to  the  third  heaven  in  the  body, 
but  had  only  said  '  whether  in  the  body,  or  out  of  the  body,  I  know  not, 

God  knoweth.^  " There  are,  besides,  other  things  in  this  narrative 

repugnant  to  history,  such  as  Daniel's  being  called  a  priest,  xiv.  1 . 
(which  has  originated  from  confounding  him  with  Daniel  the  priest, 
Ezr.  viii.  2.  Neh.  x.  7.  (6.)  )  ;  the  king's  commanding  that  the  idol 
Bel  should  be  broken  in  pieces  ;   and  the  assertion  that  a  dragon  was 

worshipped  at  Babylon. These  difficulties  are  so  great,  that  no 

one  has  attempted  to  remove  them  ;  yet  they  all  disappear  if  we 
choose  to  say  that  these  narratives  are  parables,  intended  by  the  au- 
vthor  to  show  the  vanity  of  idols  and  of  sacred  animals,  and  the  impos- 
tures of  their  priests  :  and  the  accomplishment  of  such  an  object  would 
liave  been  exceedingly  useful  to  the  Jews,  when  dweUing  in  Egypt, 
and  falling  off  to  the  worship  of  idols  and  sacred  animals. 

§  230.     Original  language  of  the  History  of  Bel  and  the  Dragon. 

There  is  no  evidence  or  indication  of  any  kind  that  this  book  was 
originally  written  in  Hebrew  or  Chaldee.  The  text  of  Theodotion,  it 
is  true,  differs  in  many  respects  from  the  Alexandrine,  so  that  it  may 
almost  seem  to  be  another  narrative  ;  but  it  bears  no  marks  of  being 
a  translation  from  the  Hebrew  or  Chaldee.  The  history  vpas,  without 
doubt,  written  in  Greek  in  the  age  of  the  Ptolemies-  kings  of  Egypt, 
where,  according  to  Herodotus,  H.  74.,  serpents  were  worshipped 
at  Thebes.  The  author  perhaps  saw  that  the  iews  were  embracing 
some  of  the  Egyptian  superstitions,  and  wrot^?  these  stories  with  the 
view  of  warning  his  brethren  of  the  vanity  o^  idolatry.  The  book  was 
therefore  suited  to  its  time,  and  may  serre  to  us  for  a  witness  that 
'  philosophy,  introduced  into  Egypt,  and  known  to  the  Jews,  was  not 
sufficient  to  prevent  apostacy  to  the  absurd  worship  of  idols  and 
animal?. 


OP    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  511 

§231.     Versions  of  this  History. 

.  The  Vulgate  Latin  version  of  this  narrative  was  translated  from 
the  text  of  Theodotion  by  Jerome,  who  says,  Praef  in  Dan.,  when 
speaking  of  these  deuterocanonical  parts  of  the  book  of  Daniel, 
"  which  (Daniel),  as  received  among  the  Hebrews,  contains  neither 
the  history  of  Susannah,  nor  the  hymn  of  the  three  children,  nor  the 
tales  of  Bel  and  the  dragon ;  all  of  which,  as  they  are  scattered 
throughout  all  the  world,  we  have  added,  lest  to  the  ignorant  we 
should  seem  to  have  cut  ofi'  a  considerable  part  of  the  book ;  but  we 
have  given  the  precedence  in  order  to  that  part  which  is  true, 
and  evinces  the  falsity  of  these."* The  Syriac  and  AraUc  ver- 
sions printed  in  the  London  Polyglot,  have  been  made  from  the  te>t 
of  Theodotion.  The  Alexandrine  text  is  translated  in  the  Hex- 
aplar  Syriac  version  of  Daniel  published  by  Bugati,  at  Milan,  in 
1788.     Comp.  Part  L  of  this  Introd.  §  51. 

*  "  Qui  (Daniel)  apud  Hebraeos  nee  Susannae  habet  historiam,  nee  hymnum  trium 
puerorum,  nee  Belis  draconisque  fabiUas,  quse  nos,  quia  in  toto  orbe  dispersa  sunt,  vero 
anteposito  easque  jugulante,  subjeeimus,  ne  videremur  apud  imperitos  magnam  partem 
voluminis  detruncasse." 


512     TAUTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


CHAPTER  III. 


OF  THE  DEUTEEOCANONICAL  ADDITIONS  TO  THE  BOOK  OF  ESTHER, 


§  232.     Contents. 

The  Alexandrine  version  of  the  book  of  Esther  contains  many 
things  which  are  wanting  in  the  Hebrew  text,  and  which  in  the  Vul- 
gate are  added  at  the  end,  c.  x.  4 — xvi.  24.*  We  will  mention  them 
as  they  are  found  in  the  Alexandrine  version,  and  will  point  out  the 

places  which  they  occupy  in  the  Vulgate. 1)  The  book  begins 

with  a  dream  of  Mordecai  concerning  two  fighting  dragons,  which 
represented  Mordecai  and  Haman.  Mention  is  also  made  of  the 
discovery  of  the  conspiracy  of  the  eunuchs  by  Mordecai,  which  is 
related  Esth.  ii.  21.  ss.  This  is  in  the  Vulgate  c.  xi.  1 — 10.  and  xii. 
1 — 6. 2)  The  royal  mandate  relating  to  the  plundering  and  slay- 
ing of  the  Jews,  iii.  13.     Vulgate;  xiii.  1 — 7. 3)  The  prayers  of 

Mordecai  and  Esther,  iv.  17.     Vulgate;  xiii.  8 — xiv.  19. 4)  The 

entrance  of  Esther  to  the  king,  V.  1.   Vulgate  ;xv.  4 — 19.  (xv.  4 — 16.) 

5)  The  royal  mandate  for  the  dehverance  of  the  Jews,  viii.  13. 

Vulgate;  xvi.  1 — 25. 6)  The  remark  that  Mordecai  now  under- 
stood the  dream  above  mentioned  ;  and  the  subscription  purporting 
that  the  epistle  concerning  the  feast  of  Phurim  or  Purim  was  brought 
by  Dositheus  into  Egypt  under  Ptolemy  and  Cleopatra,  c.  x.  3.  Vul- 
gate; X.  3 — xi.  1. 

*  [In  the  English  translation  forming  a  separate  book  in  the  Apocrypha,  under  this 
title  :  "  The  rest  of  the  chapters  of  the  book  of  Esther,  which  are  found  neither  in 
the  Hebrew  nor  in  the  Cbaldee."     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMEXT.  513 

§  233.     Language  of  these  additions. 

Tlie  Chaldee  text  of  these  additions,  found  in  some  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts, has  been  translated  from  the  Greek,  and  interpolated  into 
those  manuscripts. [a]  For  the  Greek  of  these  fragments  is  evidently 
that  of  a  Jew  writing  in  that  language,  and  exhibits  not  the  slightest 
trace  of  a  Chaldee  original.  The  diversity  of  style  in  the  dilTereiit 
fragments,  too,  shows  that  they  have  been  written  by  different  authors. 
Jerome,  Prsef.  in  Esth.,  says,  concerning  them  :  "  It  is  certain  that 
the  book  of  Esther  has  been  corrupted  by  its  various  translators.  I 
have  more  closely  rendered  it  word  for  word,  exhibiting  it  to  the 
reader  as  it  is  found  in  the  records  of  the  Hebrews.  This  book  is 
swelled  out  in  the  [old]  Vulgate  edition  with  patchwork  appendages 
of  matter  which  might  be  said  and  heard  extempore,  such  as  students 
in  the  schools  compose  on  some  given  theme,  inventing  speeches  suit- 
able to  the  character  of  an  injured  person,  or  of  him  who  does  the 
injury."* Besides,  there  are  some  passages  which  are  contradic- 
tory to  the  protocanonical  book,  as  c.  xvi.  14.  comp.  Esth.  ii.  2 — 23, 
Henoe  Sixtus  Senensis  says,  Biblioth.  Sanct.  p.  33,  "  the  other  six 
chapters,  extending  to  the  close  of  the  book,  are  added  by  some  un- 
known Greek  writer  from  various  histories,  but  especially  from  the 
eleventh  book  of  the  Antiquities  of  Josephus,  from  which  tlie  copy 
of  the  letter  of  Haman,  and  that  of  the  proclamation  of  the  king, 

given  in  c.  xiii.  and  xiv.  are  taken  word  for  word." Those  who 

urge  that  the  deuterocanonical  parts  throw  light  on  the  book  of 
Esther  and  must  therefore  be  portions  of  it,  do  not  consider  that  the 
same  remark  might  be  made  of  scholia,  which  are  certainly  not  parts 
of  the  works  to  which  they  are  appended. 

[a)  This  is  asserted  bv  Jahn  in  opposition  to  the  hypothesis  maintained 
by  De  Rossi,  Specimen  variorum  Lectionum  Sacri  textus  V.  T.  et  Chal- 
daica  Estheris  additamenta.  1782,  Roma,  pp.  131.  ss.,  that  the  whole 

♦  "  Librum  Esther  variis  translatoribus  constat  esse  vitiatum,  quern  ego  de  ar- 
chivis  Hebraeorum  revelans,  verbum  e  verbo  expressius  transtuli.  Quem  librum  edi- 
tio  (antiquior)  Vulgata  laciniosis  hinc  inde  verborum  sinibus  trahit,  addens,  quae  ex 
tempore  dici  poterant  et  audiri,  sicut  solitum  est  scholaribus  discipulis,  sumto  the- 
mate  excogitare,  quibus  verbis  uti  potuerit,  qui  injuriam  passus  est,  vel  qui  inju- 
riam  fecit." 

65 


514    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

book  of  Esther,  together  with  these  additions,  was  originally  written  ji 
Chaldee,  and  that  the  present  Hebrew  book  is  an  abridgment  of  it,  omit- 
ting the  deuterocanonical  parts,  which  have  been  restored  by  the  Alex- 
andrine translator.     See  Germ.  Introd.  S.  283.  ff.     Tr.] 

§  234,     Versions  of  these  fragments. 

The  Latin  version  of  these  fragments  is  not  by  Jerome,  but  more 
ancient  than  his  time.  In  the  Vulgate  they  are  thrown  at  the  end  of 
the  book,  because  Jerome,  who  followed  the  Hebrew,  did  not  think 

proper  to  give  them  any  place  in  the  text. An  imperfect  Arabic 

version,  and  a  Syriac  version,  are  contained  in  the  London  Polyglot. 

The  Chaldee  version  already  noticed,  is  sometimes  more  diffuse, 

sometimes  more  succinct,  than  the  Greek  text ;  it  has  been  published 
by  EvoDius  AssEMAN  in  his  Bibliotheca  Vaticana,  whence  it  was  ta- 
ken by  De  Rossi,  Specimen  Var.  Lect.  V.  T. 

§  235.     Whether  these  additions  are  Deuterocanonical. 

The  common  opinion  is,  that  these  additions  are  part  of  the  se- 
cond canon.  But  Sixtus  Senensis,  Bibliotheca  Sancta,  Tom.  I.  §  6. 
p.  22.  s.,  reckons  them  among  the  apocryphal  books,  and  says :  "  It 
occurs  to  me  at  present,  to  admonish  and  exhort  the  pious  and  bene- 
volent reader,  not  to  accuse  me  of  temerity  because  I  have  detached 
these  latter  seven  chapters  from  the  canonical  scriptures,  and  thrown 
them  back  into  this  lowest  rank,  among  the  apocryphal  books,  as 
though  I  had  forgotten  the  decree  of  the  holy  Council  of  Trent, 
which  under  pain  of  anathema,  commands  us  to  receive  all  the  books 
entire,  as  they  have  been  accustomed  to  be  read  in  the  Catholic 
Church,  and  are  contained  in  the  old  Latin  Vulgate  edition.  That 
canon  is  to  be  understood  of  the  true  and  genuine  parts,  which  only 
are  necessary  to  constitute  the  integrity  of  a  bdok  ;  and  not  of  any 
mutilated  appendixes,  and  patchwork  additions  rashly  affixed  by  some 
unknown  author,  and  in  some  way  or  other  foisted  in.  Yet  such  is 
the  character  of  these  last  chapters,  which  are  not  only  rejected  from 
the  canon  by  Cardinal  Hugo,  Nicolas  de  Lyra,  Dionysius  the  Carthu- 
sian, and  other  more  modern  interpreters,  but  are  also  separated  from 
the  whole  book  of  Esther  by  Saint  Jerome,  as  a  corrupted  part,  and, 
to  use  his  own  words,  '  as  patchwork  appendages  of  matter  which 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  515 

might  be  said  and  heard  extempore,  such  as  students  in  schools  com- 
pose on  some  given  theme,  inventing  speeches  suitable  to  the  charac- 
ter of  an  injured  person,  or  to  that  of  him  who  has  done  the  injury.' 
Origen  too,  in  his  epistle  to  Julius  Africanus,   throws  aside  these 

same  additions  with  contempt." On  these  matters  every  one  is 

free  to  form  his  own  opinion :  but  the  book  of  Sixtus  Senensis  was 
accepted  by  Benedict  XIV.  when  dedicated  to  him  by  Milante.[a] 

[a)  The  struggles  of  the  author  in  this,  and  indeed,  in  all  the  prece- 
ding sections,  to  evade  the  dogmatic  decisions  of  his  church,  must  be  evi- 
dent to  every  reader.  They  afford  additional  proof,  if  proof  were  need- 
ed, of  the  correctness  of  the  Protestant  canon  of  Scripture.     Tr.] 


5I(>         PARTICULAR    IMRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 


CHAPTEK  iV. 


ox    THE    BOOK    OP    TOBIT. 


5  236.     Contents. 


The  book  of  Tobit  contains  a  narrative,  belonging  to  the  time  of 
the  Assyrian  captivity,  and  relating  to  Tobit  the  father,  (according  to 
the  Vulgate  Tobias,)  and  his  son  Tobias.     The  principal  heads  are 

as  follows. Tobit  of  the  tribe  of  Naphtali,  a  native  of  the  city 

Thisbe,  or  Thesbe,  in  Galilee,  having  been  carried  captive  into  Assy- 
ria by  Salmanasar  after  the  destruction  of  Samaria,  and  having  been 
made  ayopas*is,  a  merchant  or  factor  for  the  king,  in  the  city  of  Nine- 
veh, constantly  adhered  to  the  law  of  Moses,  was  a  benefactor  of  the 
needy  Israehtes,  and  even  secretly  buried  the  slain,  who  were  thrown 
on  the  outside  of  the  walls.     On  a  certain  journey  he  had  deposited 
ten  talents  of  silver  with  Gabael  in  Rages,  a  city  of  Media.     Being 
deprived  of  his  office,  under  Sennacherib,  he  did  not  cease  secretly 
to  bury  the  Israelites  whom  that  monarch  frequently  put  to  death  after 
the  destruction  which  his  army  had  sustained  in  Judea.     At  length 
being  betrayed,  he  merely  saved  his  life  by  flight,  but  was  despoiled 
of  all  his  property,  i.  1 — 20.     Sennacherib  being  a  short  time  after 
slain  by  his  sons,  Tobit,  by  the  intercession  of  his  relative  Achiacha- 
rus,  who  had  been  elevated  to  an  exalted  dignity,  obtained  from  Esar- 
haddon  permission  to  return  to  Nineveh,  and  went  on  in  his  practice 
of  burying  the  murdered  Israelites.     Having  interred  one  of  them 
on  the  feast  of  Pentecost,  and  on  account  of  the  uncleanness  thus 
contracted,  having  slept  in  the  court  of  his  house  under  shelter  of  a 
wall,  the  dung  of  swallows  who  had  built  their  nests  in  the  wall,  fell 
into  his  eyes,  and  brought  on  X£uxwfji,«ra  or  white  spots  in  his  eyes, 


OF    THK    OLD    TESTAMENT.  rjl? 

winch  r.educed  the  pious  old  man  to  total  bHndness  ;  c.  i.  21 — ii.  10. 
He  bore  this  affliction  with  patience,  and  was  supported  at  first,  till 
lie  removed  to  Elymais,  by  Achiacharus,  and  after  that  by  the  wages 
which  his  wife  received  for  her  labour.  On  some  occasion  she  re- 
ceived a  kid  in  addition  to  her  ordinary  wages,  and  Tobit,  upon  hear- 
ing its  bleating,  supposed  it  to  have  been  stolen,  and  vehemently 
urged  its  restitution.  His  wife,  offended  at  this,  reproached  him,  not 
only  with  this  unjust  suspicion,  but  even  with  his  former  beneficence, 
which  had  not  prevented  his  becoming  blind.  The  old  man  was  ex- 
ceedingly distressed  at  this,  and  intreated  God  to  put  an  end  to  his 

life  ;  ii.  10 — iii.  6. The  same  day,  Sarah,  daughter  of  Raguel, 

Tobit's  cousin,  was  reproached  by  her  maids  with  having  slain  her 
seven  husbands,  all  of  whom  had  been  killed  in  her  chamber  by  As- 
modeus  on  the  very  day  of  their  nuptials.  This  so  terrified  the  young 
woman  that  she  thought  of  strangling  herself,  but  desisted  lest  she 
should  afflict  her  parents,  praying  God  to  grant  her  death  ;  c.  iii.  7 — 

14. Tobit,  hoping  soon  to  reach  the  end  of  his  life,  furnishes  his 

son  Tobias  with  salutary  admonitions,  and  sends  him  to  the  city  Ra- 
ges to  receive  the  ten  talents  that  were  due  to  him  there.  Tobias, 
having  found  out  a  fit  companion  who  called  himself  Azariah  the  sou 

of  the  elder  Ananiah,  commences  his  journey,  c.  iv.  v. At  the 

end  of  the  first  day's  journey,  Tobias  bathing  at  evening  in  the  Tigris, 
meets  with  an  enormous  fish,  which,  by  the  advice  of  his  companion 
Azariah,  he  seizes,  draws  out  of  the  water,  embowels,  and  by  the 
same  advice  preserves  the  heart,  liver,  and  gall,  as  useful  medicines ; 

vi.  1 — 9. As  they  approach  Ecbatana  Azariah  persuades  Tobias 

to  marry  the  Sarah  already  mentioned,  the  daughter  of  Raguel,  who 
was  very  rich,  and  Tobias,  informed  by  Azariah  that  Asmodeus,  who 
had  slain  the  seven  former  husbands  of  Sarah,  had  no  power  over 
those  who  married  merely  for  the  sake  of  having  children,  and  that 
this  prince  of  the  demons  might  be  put  to  flight  by  the  smoke  of  the 
heart  and  liver  of  the  fish,  consents  ;  vi.  10 — 17.  The  marriage  is 
contracted,  c.  vii.,  and  the  first  night  Tobias  burns  the  heart  and 
liver  of  the  fish,  by  the  smoke  of  which  Asmodeus  is  put  to  flight, 
and  to  prevent  his  return  he  is  bound  with  chains  by  an  angel  in  the 
desert  of  Upper  Egypt.  Then  Tobias  offers  a  prayer  to  God,  in 
which  he  states  the  end  of  rnatriraonv,  c.  viii.     In  the  mean  time  his 


518         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO   EACH    BOOK 

companion  Azariah  having  gone  alone  fee  the  city  Rages,  brings 
thence  the  ten  talents,  and  with  them  Gabael  also  to  the  nuptials. 
Upon  the  complete  celebration  of  these,  Tobias,  accompanied  by  his 
wife  Sarah,  who  takes  with  her  the  half  of  her  father's  fortune  as  a 
dowry,  returns  to  his  parents,  who  had  already  begun  to  be  anxious 
respecting  him.  Tobias,  in  pursuance  of  the  instructions  of  Aza- 
riah, rubs  the  eyes  of  his  father  with  the  gall  of  the  fish,  and  so  re- 
stores his  sight,  c.  ix — xi. At  last  Tobit  and  Tobias,  offering  Aza- 
riah as  a  reward,  five  talents  of  the  money  received  from  Gabael,  are 
informed  by  him  that  he  is  the  angel  Raphael,  one  of  the  seven  spi- 
rits who  stand,  or  minister,  in  the  presence  of  God,  and  present  the 
prayers  of  men.  The  angel  relieves  them  from  their  amazement  and 
disappears,  Tobit  rendering  thanks  to  God,  c.  xii — xiii.  It  is  added 
that  the  father,  Tobit,  attained  the  age  of  158,  (in  the  Vulgate  102,) 
and  the  son,  Tobias,  that  of  127,  (in  the  Vulgate  99,)  c.  xiv. 

§  237.     Difficulties  of  the  Book  of  Tobit. 

The  difficulties  that  occur  in  this  narrative  are  of  no  small  mo- 
ment.  1)  The  seven  angels  standing  or  ministering  before  God, 

who  present  to  God  the  prayers  of  men. 2)  The  angel  Raphael, 

clothed  with  a  human  form,  falsely  asserts  that  he  is  an  Israelite,  and 

performs  a  long  journey. 3)  Asmodeus,  or  the  devil  or  Ahriman. 

smitten  with  love  for  Sarah,  slays  her  seven  husbands, — is  put  to 
flight  by  the  smoke  of  the  heart  and  liver  of  the  fish, — and  is  bound 

with  cords  in  Upper  Egypt. 4)  The  dung  of  the  swallows  falls 

upon  both  the  eyes  of  the  old  man  Tobit  at  once,  and,  afler  having 

been  made  blind,  his  sight  is  restored  by  the  gall  of  the  fish. 

5")  Tobit  and  Sarah  are  both  unjustly  reproached  at  the  same  time, 
pray  at  the  same  time  for  death,  and  obtain  at  the  same  time  help 
from  the  angel  Raphael.     So  many  coincidences  do  not  look  like 

history. 6)  The  city  Rages  or  Ragia  in  Media  was,  according  to 

Strabo,  p.  524.,  founded  by  Seleucus  Nicator,  afler  the  year  300 
B.  C,  and  yet  according  to  our  book  it  must  have  been  already  in 
existence  700  years  before  Christ.  The  Rages  mentioned  by  Ar- 
RiAN  in  Expedit.  Alexandri,  L.  III.  c.  20.,  is  not  called  a  city,  but 
5(upos,  a  place,  or  region,  and  perhaps  Arrian  first  gave  it  the  name. 
7)  Tobit  is  said  to  have  been  carried  into  captivity  by  Saima- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  519 

nasar,  wliereas  the  tribe  of  Naphtali  was  carried  away  by  Tiglath- 
pileser.     Perhaps,  however,  it  may  be  thought  that  Tobit  had  before 

that  time  removed  to  Samaria. The  ages  of  Tobit  and  Tobias  are 

unreasonably  great ;  but  perhaps  this  has  originated  in  the  mistakes 
of  transcribers  ;  for  the  Vulgate  version  has  smaller  numbers,  [a] 

[a)  But  it  is  at  least  as  probable  that  these  numbers  should  have  been 
altered  in  the  Vulgate  to  lessen  the  difficulties  of  the  narrative,  as  that 
they  should  have  been  increased,  <egainst  all  verisimilitude,  by  a  trans- 
criber.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  309.  anm.  a),  adds  to  this  list  of  diffi- 
culties, the  significancy  of  the  proper  names  ;  referring  to  Bertholdt, 
S.  2494.  f.     Tr.] 

§  238.     Solution  of  the  difficulties  of  Tobit. 

These  difficulties  have  induced  most  of  the  modern  interpreters  to 
conclude  that  the  narrative  is  a  parable,  teaching  that  the  prayers  of 
the  good  who  are  oppressed  with  calamities  are  heard  by  God  ; 

which  is  declared  by  Raphael  in  express  words  ;  c.  xii.  15. [a] 

Some  others  think  that  the  principal  points  of  the  narration  are 
founded  on  historic  truth,  and  the  marvellous  circumstances  which 
occur  they  ascribe  either  to  the  gradual  exaggeration  of  a  historical 
fact  handed  down  by  a  long  course  of  oral  tradition,  or  to  the  illus- 
tration and  ornament  of  the  writer.  [6]  They  who  place  the  whole 
narrative  in  the  rank  of  true  histories,  think  that  they  can  get  over 
all  the  difficulties  by  the  single  answer,  that  they  are  miracles. 

[a)  This  is  the  opinion  of  De  Wette,  Einleit.  §  309.,  who  grounds  it 
entirely  on  the  similarity  of  this  book  to  that  of  Job,  and  its  miraculous 
stories. ^But  surely  the  former  is  not  very  striking,  and  is  entirely  in- 
sufficient to  prove  the  parabolic  design  of  the  work.     Tr-I 

[b)  So  Ilgen,  Die  Geschichte  Tobis  nach  drey  verschiedenen  Origi- 
nalen,  dem  griechischen,  dem  lateinischen  des  Hieronymus,  und  einem 
syrischen,  uebersetzt  und  mit  Anmerkungen  exegetischen  und  kritiseheii 
Inhalts  und  einer  Einleitung  versehen,  1800,  S.  Iv — xcix.  He  relies  on 
1)  the  notice  of  Tobit's  tribe,  and  the  tracing  of  his  genealogy  througli 
four  generations,  and  the  mention  of  his  birth-place,  i.  1.  s.,  all  of  which 
would  have  been  needless  and  superfluous  in  a  parable.  2)  The  mention 
that  Tobit  was  an  orphan,  and  brought  up  by  his  grandmother  Deborah; 
J.  8.    3)  The  unostentatious  notice  of  Tobit's  situation  as  royal  factor, 


.'>20    PARTICULAR  LVTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

and  of  the  high  aJvancement  of  Achiacharan  his  brother's  son,  i.  13,  21 . 
Both  of  these  last  circumstances  are  very  little  to  be  expected  in  a 
parable.] 

§  239.     The  language  of  the  hook  of  Tohit. 

No  Hebrew  text  of  this  book  was  found  either  by  Jerome  or  by 
Origen  :  nor  can  it  be  proved  by  internal  aiguments  taken  from  the 
Alexandrine  text,  that  any  such  has  ever  existed.  What  Tlgen,  Ge- 
schichte  Tobit,  u,  s.  f.  S.  cxxiii — cxxt.,  has  advanced  to  the  con- 
trary is  by  no  means  satisfactory,  as  I  have  shown  in  my  German  In- 
trod.  §  239.  p.  900—902.  Jerome  had  indeed  a  Chaldee  text  ;  but 
it  is  impossible  to  show  that  it  was  not  a  translation  from  the  Greek. 
The  author  seems  therefore  to  have  wriiten  in  Greek. [a] 

[a)  The  reader  who  is  curious  to  examine  this  subject  should  consult 
De  Wette,  Einleit.  f  310.,  who  gives  very  numerous  references  in  sup- 
port of  the  opinion  of  llgen.  lie  also  maintains  that  not  only  the  Chal- 
dee and  Greek,  but  also  the  Syriac  and  old  Latin  or  Italic  versions,  are 
separate  and  independent  texts,  or  editions  of  this  narrative.  He  argues 
from  the  material  differences  in  all  four  in  1)  names ;  2)  accounts  of 
jiarticular  circumstances ;  3)  appendices ;  4)  omissions ;  and  5)  more  or 
less  full  representations  of  the  same  events  and  speeches.  Anm.  b),  d), 
and  e).     Tr.] 

§  240,     Age  of  the  booh  of  Tobit. 

That  the  book  was  not  written  in  the  age  of  Tobit  himself,  is  plain 
from  the  fact  that  he  is  represented  as  living  under  the  reigns  of 
^?almanasar,  Sennacherib,  and  Esarhaddon,  (734 — 678  B.  C.)  at 
which  time  the  Magian  ideas  concerning  Asmodeus  or  Ahriman,  and 
concerning  the  seven  spirits  that  stand  before  the  throne  of  God,  &-c. 
were  not  yet  introduced  and  mingled  with  the  Mosaic  religion.  This 
is  confirmed  by  the  mention  of  the  city  Rages,  first  built  by  Seleucus 
Nicator,  which  could  not  have  been  made  by  the  author  without 
raising  a  difficulty  in  the  mind  of  his  readers,  by  carrying  back  to 
such  a  remote  antiquity  the  existence  of  so  modern  a  city,  unless  he 
had  lived  at  a  time  when  its  founder  had  already  been  forgotten. 
The  book,  therefore,  could  not  have  been  written  more  than  1 50  or 
200  years  before  Christ. That  it  was  written  after  the  Christian 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  ,021 

era,  is  entirely  unsusceptible  of  proof.  The  silence  of  Josephus  and 
Philo  respecting  Tobit  proves  nothing  ;  for  both  writers  are  silent 
also  concerning  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach.  Josephus,  doubtless,  con- 
sidered the  contents  of  the  book  as  parabolical,  and  therefore  could 
no  more  use  it  in  his  Antiquities  than  he  could  the  book  of  Job. 
Besides,  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament  had  read  the  book  of 
Tobit ;  for  proof  of  which  comp.  Rev.  xxi.  18.  ss.  with  Tob.  xiii, 
16.  s.  [a] 

[a)  This  is  merely  an  instance  of  the  same  figurative  language, 
which  of  itself  is  by  no  means  sufficient  to  establish  the  position  of  the 
author.     TV.] 

§  241.     Of  the  Author  of  the  book  of  Tobit. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  is  evident  that  the  command  given  by 
Raphael,  according  to  the  Greek  text,  xii.  20.,  that  what  had  taken 
place  should  be  written  down,  is  nothing  more  than  a  recommenda- 
tion of  the  book,  as  being  written  at  tiie  command  of  an  angel.  This 
command,  therefore,  which  is  not  given  in  the  Vulgate,  is  merely  an 

ornament  of  style. It  is  true  that  Tobit  speaks,  i.  3 — iii.  6.,  in 

the  first  person  and  in  a  simple  way  ;  but  this  is  no  proof  that  this 
portion  of  the  book  was  written  by  Tobit  himself,  or  by  some  person 
different  from  the  author  of  the  remainder  of  the  work,  which  speaks 
of  Tobit  only  in  the  third  person :  for  the  change  of  persons  may 
readily  be  attributed  to  the  fancy  of  the  writer,  as  the  orientals  take 

great  liberties  in  changing  the  person  in  which  they  write. Ilgen 

divides  the  book  into  three  parts,  (I.  c.  i.  1 — iii.  6.;  II.  c.  iii.  7 — 
xii.  22.  and  c.  xiv.;  III.  c.  xiii.,)  which  he  supposes  to  be  the  pro- 
ductions of  three  different  authors.  But  the  arguments  which  he 
adduces  in  support  of  his  opinion  are  far-fetched  and  forced,  and  the 
circumstances  on  which  he  founds  them  may  be  more  easily  ac- 
counted for  in  other  ways.  See  Germ.  Introd.  P.  II.  Sect.  IV. 
§  241.  p.  906.  s.  [a] 

[a)  See  also  the  arguments  of  Ilgen  in  De  Wette,  Einleit.  J  310. 
anm.  h).     TV.] 

66 


522    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  242.      Versions  of  the  book  of  Tobit. 

The  Vulgate  version  is  by  Jerome,  who  says  of  it,  Praef.  in  Tob., 
"  I  cannot  but  wonder  at  the  importunity  of  your  demands  ;  for  you 
require  me  to  clothe  in  the  Latin  language  a  book  written  in  the 
Chaldee  tongue,  and  that  too  the  book  of  Tobit,  which  the  Hebrews 
have  separated  from  the  catalogue  of  the  holy  scriptures,  and  classed 
with  the  writings  which  they  call  hagiographa.  I  have  done  enough 
to  satisfy  your  desires  but  not  my  own  wishes.  They  find  fault  with 
our  Hebrew  studies,  and  accuse  us  of  transferring  such  books  as 
these  into  the  Latin  language,  against  their  canon.  But  as  I  think  it 
preferable  to  incur  the  condemnation  of  Pharisees,  and  to  obey  the 
commands  of  the  bishops,  I  have  done  it  to  the  best  of  my  abihty. 
As  the  Chaldee  language  has  a  close  affinity  to  the  Hebrew,  I  ob- 
tained a  skilful  interpreter  of  both  languages,  and  setting  apart  a  day 
for  the  work,  made  him  interpret  the  Chaldee  to  me  in  Hebrew 
words,  which,  as  he  uttered  them,  I  again  dictated  in  the*  Latin  lan- 
guage to  a  secretary."*  Such  a  precipitate  method  of  procedure 
could  hardly  produce  a  faithful  and  accurate  version.  The  Jew  ren- 
dering the  Chaldee  into  Hebrew,  may  have  committed  many  errors, 
the  number  of  which  was,  without  doubt,  enlarged  by  Jerome,  when 
he  dictated  it  extempore  in  Latin,  as  it  was  interpreted  to  him  in  He- 
brew. This  is  enough  to  account  for  the  frequent  differences  be- 
tween the  Vulgate  version  and  the  Greek  text. There  is  extant 

also  another  older  Latin  version,  made  from  the  Greek  text,  which 
has  been  pubhshed  by  Sabatier  in  his  Bibliorum  Sacrorum  Lat.  vers, 
autiq.  1751. The  Syriac  version  is  of  an  uncertain  age,  and  has 


*  ["  Mirari  non  desino  exactionis  vestrae  instantiam  ;  exigitis  cnim,  ut  librum 
Chaldaeo  sermone  conscriptum  ad  Latinum  stilum  traham,  librum  utique  Tobiae, 
quern  Hebraei  de  catalogo  diviBarum  scripturaruin  secantes,  his,  quae  hagiographa 
memorant,  manciparunt.  Feci  satis  desiderio  vestro,  non  meo  studio.  Arguunt  et 
nos  Hebraeorum  studia,  et  imputant  nobis,  contra  suum  canonem  Latinis  auribus  ista 
transferre.  Sed  melius  esse  judicans,  Pharisaeorum  displicere  judicio,  et  episcoporam 
jussionibus  deservire,  institi  ut  potui.  Et  quia  vicina  est  Chaldaeorum  lingua  sermoni 
Hebraico,  utriusque  linguae  peritissimum  loquacem  reperiens,  unius  diei  laborem  ar- 
ripui,  et  quidquid  ille  mihi  Hebraicis  verbis  expressit,  hoc  ego  accito  notario  sermo' 
nibus  Latinis  exposiii."] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  523 

been  made  from  the  Greek  text.     It  is  printed  in  the  fourth  volume 

of  the  London  Polyglot. That  work  contains  also  two  Hebrew 

versions  of  this  book,  of  no  great  antiquity.  The  first  of  these, 
made  from  the  Greek  text,  was  first  published  by  Paul  Fagius  at  the 
end  of  the  Sentences  of  Ben  Sirach,  1 542,  and  has  since  been  printed 
at  Constantinople  in  1617.    The  other,  published  by  Sebastian  Mun- 

ster  in  1542,  seems  to  have  been  made  from  a  Latin  version. All 

these  versions  differ  from  each  other  in  many  respects,  but  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  determine  whether  the  discrepancies  originated  with  .the  trans- 
lators themselves,  or  are  the  fault  of  transcribers,  [a] 

\a)  See  De  Wette,  Einleit.  5  310.  anm.     TV.] 


.724    VARTirULAK  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


CHAPTER  \ 


OF   THE    BOOK   OF   JUDITH. 


§  243.     Contents  of  the  Book. 

Nebuchadnezzar,  king  of  Nineveh,  in  the  twelfth  year  of  liis 
reign,  being  injured  by  the  warlike  incursions  which  were  made  on. 
the  frontiers  of  Ragau  by  Arphaxad,  king  of  Media  and  founder  of 
Ecbatana,  obtains  from  tlie  neighbouring  nations  some  auxiliary 
troops.  He  sends  also  to  others  more  distant,  which  are  recounted 
in  a  geographical  order  altogether  peculiar,  and  entirely  different 
from  that  of  their  real  situations  ;  these  all  dismiss  his  ambassadors 
without  any  marks  of  honour.  Nebuchadnezzar  on  this  account  re- 
solves to  ruin  them,  and,  after  having  conquered  and  slain  Arphaxad, 
sends  Holofernes  with  a  numerous  army,  who  brings  great  calamities 
upon  those  nations,  which  are  again  enumerated,  in  a  still  more  ex- 
traordinary geographical  arrangement.  Notwithstanding  the  volun- 
tary submission  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  sea  coasts,  who  became 
terrified  by  these  proceedings,  Holofernes  plunders  their  cities,  burns 
their  groves,  and  breaks  in  pieces  their  idols,  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
alone  may  be  worshipped  as  God.  After  this>  having  pitched  his 
camp  in  the  plain  of  Esdraelon,  he  remains  at  rest  a  whole  month, 
c.  i — iii. The  Jews,  however,  \yho  had  lately  returned  from  cap- 
tivity, and  had  restored  the  tempk  and  worship  of  God,  prepare  for 
war  under  the  direction  of  the  high  priest  and  the  elders.  The  high 
priest  Joachim  writes  to  the  inhabitants  of  the  cities  of  Bethylua  (ac- 
cording to  the  Vulgate,  Bethulia)  and  Betomesthaim,  which  were  on 
fhe  borders  of  Esdraelon,  to  guard  carefully  the  passes  of  the  moun- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  525 

tains.  In  the  mean  time  all  the  Jews  fast,  and  implore  help  from 
God,  c.  iv.  Holofernes,  wondering  at  their  unusual  boldness,  in- 
quires of  his  captains,  who  this  people  was.  Achior,  leader  of  the 
Ammonites,  in  reply,  gives  a  brief  history  of  the  Hebrews,  in  which 
he  shows,  that  so  long  as  they  continued  faithful  to  their  God  they 
were  invincible,  and  dissuades  Holofernes  from  undertaking  a  war 
with  them,  unless  he  is  well  assured  that  they  have  apostatized  from 
their  God,  c.  v.  Holofernes,  enraged  at  his  unwelcome  counsel, 
orders  him  to  be  given  up  to  the  inhabitants  of  Bethulia,  that  he  may 

undergo  the  same  fate  with  them,  c.  vi. The  next  day  having 

occupied  the  passes  of  the  mountains  of  Bethulia,  he  intercepts  their 
supplies  of  water,  in  order  to  oblige  the  city  to  surrender.  After 
thirty-four  days  the  inhabitants  are  reduced  to  such  extremities  that 
they  resolve  to  yield,  unless  some  aid  should  arrive  within  five  days, 
0.  vii.  Upon  hearing  this,  Judith,  a  rich  and  beautiful  widow,  calls 
the  governor  and  senate  of  the  city,  and  having  upbraided  them  for 
their  design  of  surrendering,  asks  them  to  have  the  gate  opened  for 
her  at  evening.  Her  request  being  complied  with,  she  goes  out 
clothed  in  the  most  splendid  manner,  and  accompanied  by  her  maid 
Abra  or  Habra  carrying  provisions,  to  Holofernes.  She  pretends  to 
be  a  deserter,  and  informs  him  that  the  Hebrews  could  not,  indeed, 
be  conquered  while  they  continued  faithful  to  their  God,  but  that 
they  were  now  about  to  convert  to  their  own  use  the  tithes  which 
were  sacred  to  the  use  of  his  priests,  and  in  this  way  to  sin  against 
him  ;  and  that  for  this  reason  she  had  left  the  city,  foreseeing  its  ap- 
proaching ruin.  She  adds,  that  she  would  remain  with  him  in  the 
camp,  if  he  would  allow  her  to  go  out  at  night  and  offer  her  prayers 
to  God,  and  that  she  would  point  out  to  him  the  time  when  the  He- 
brews, having  apostatized  from  their  God,  might  be  conquered,  and 
would  be  his  guide  even  to  Jerusalem,  c.  vii — xi.  This  gratifies 
Holofernes,  and  Judith  is  well  received.  But  on  the  fourth  day, 
being  left  alone  with  Holofernes  when  he  is  drunk,  she  cuts  off  his 
head  while  asleep,  and  giving  it  to  her  maid  Abra  to  carry  in  her 
bag,  leaves  the  camp  as  she  had  been  accustomed  to  do,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  prayer,  but  returns  to  Bethulia,  where  she  displays  the  head 
of  Holofernes  to  the  governor  and  the  people.  In  the  morning  the 
besieged  make  a  sally,  and  the  enemy,  deprived  of  their  general,  are 


526  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

put  to  flight.  The  rejoicings  of  all  the  Jews  and  the  song  of  victory 
of  Judith,  with  an  account  of  the  remainder  of  her  Ufe,  and  of  her 
honourable  sepulture,  conclude  the  book,  c.  xii — xvi. 

§  244.     Difficulties  of  the  Book  of  Judith. 

Inextricable  difficulties  in  geography,  chronology,  and  history,  per- 
vade the  whole  of  this  book.  For  the  sake  of  brevity  we  will  only 
undertake  to  show  that  there  is  no  period  of  time  in  which  all  the 
things  related  in  the  book  could  have  taken  place. 

I.  Not  before  the  captivity;  for  in  c.  iv.  3.  v.  18.  s.  and  in  the  Vul- 
gate in  V.  22,  s.  the  return  from  the  captivity  is  expressly  mentioned. 
Nor  can  the  silence  respecting  any  king  of  the  Hebrews,  and  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  government  by  the  high  priest  and  the  elders,  be 
reconciled  with  a  date  antecedent  to  the  captivity.  It  cannot  be  said 
that  this  is  accounted  for  by  supposing  Manasseh,  king  of  Judah,  to 
have  been  a  captive  in  Babylon  ;  for  at  that  time  neither  Arphaxad, 
king  of  Media,  nor  Nebuchadnezzar,  were  in  existence,  nor  was 
Nineveh  standing,  as  it  had  been  destroyed  by  Nabopolassar.  father 
of  Nebuchadnezzar.  Besides,  it  could  not  have  been  said  then,  as 
Judith  says,  that  none  of  the  people  worshipped  idols  ;  nor  could  a 
general  of  Nebuchadnezzar  who  had  carried   away  the  Jews,  find 

Jews  in  Palestine  and  be  ignorant  who  they  were. [a] It  appears 

to  me,  that  the  author  of  the  book  has  confounded  Nebuchadnezzar 
with  Neriglissar,  who,  when  he  was  preparing  an  expedition  against 
the  Medes,  invited  the  Lydians,  Phrygians,  Carians,  Cappadocians, 
CiUcians,  Paphlagonians.  and  other  neighbouring  nations,  to  join  in 
the  war.  But  he  did  not  conquer  the  Medes,  but  was  slain  by 
Cyrus :  comp.  Archsol.  P.  II.  T.  I.  §  47.   S.  216. 

II.  Nor  is  there  any  space  of  time  subsequent  to  the  return  from 
the  Babylonian  captivity  in  which  this  history  may  be  placed.  For 
the  Hebrews  were  207  years  subject  to  the  Persians,  then  to  Alex- 
ander, to  the  Ptolemies,  the  kings  of  Egypt,  and  last  of  all  to  the 
kings  of  Syria,  till  they  recovered  their  hberty.  If  any  thing  like 
the  matter  of  this  history  had  happened  it  must  have  been  in  the  age 
of  Antiochus  Epiphanes.  But  this  is  at  variance  with  the  statement 
that  the  Hebrews  had  had  their  temple  destroyed,  and  had  been  carried 
captive,  but  now.  having  returned  only  a  short  time  before,  had  restored 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  527 

the  tomple  and  worship  of  God.  Moreover  no  age  in  all  this  period 
witnessed  an  Arphaxad  king  of  Media,  or  a  Nebuchadnezzar  king  of 
Nineveh.  This  last  place  did  not  even  exist  ;  for  it  had  been  de- 
stroyed by  Nabopolassar,  625  B.  C,  and  was  never  afterward  rebuilt, 
as  Herodotus,  I.  106,  Strabo,  p.  737,  Eusebius,  Chronicon,  p.  124, 
and  SsTNCELLUs,  p.  218,  unanimously  testify. 

[a)  Prideaux,  Connexions,  Book  I.  sab  anno  655,  Vol.  1.  pp.  35 — 43, 
is  inclined  to  consider  the  book  of  Judith  as  a  true  history,  with  some 
amplifications  and  exaggerations,  such  as  xvi.  23, 25.  He  places  it  in  the 
forty-third  year  of  Manasseh,  which  was  the  twelfth  of  Saosduchinus, 
king  of  Assyria,  and  the  last  of  Dejoces,  king  of  the  Medes,  He  noti- 
ces most  of  the  objections,  but  confesses  that  they  hardly  admit  of  an- 
swers.    TV.] 

§  246.     Solution  of  the  Difficulties  in  the  Book  of  Judith. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  appears  how  strongly  they  are  armed 
who  impugn  the  historical  truth  of  this  narrative  and  contend  that 
the  book  contains  a  parable,  which  teaches  that  the  Hebrews  as  long 
as  they  remained  faithful  to  God,  might  expect  deliverance  even  in 

the  utmost  extremity  of  danger. [a] Some,  however,  think  that  at 

least  the  principal  points  of  the  history  are  true.  [6]  They  bring  no 
arguments  in  favour  of  their  opinion,  it  is  true,  except  the  single  one 
that  every  thing  is  told  in  a  historic  style  :  yet  it  might  be  urged  that 

the  genealogy  in  viii.  1.  would  be  entirely  useless  in  a  parable. 

They  who  think  that  the  entire  narrative  is  a  true  history,  either  do 
not  notice  the  difficulties  at  all,  or  touch  them  very  slightly,  or  at  least 
do  not  give  them  all  their  force,  in  order  to  avoid  them  with  the  more 
facility.  Yet  after  all  they  confess  that  they  cannot  extricate  them- 
selves from  all.  Du  Pin,  Prolog.  L.  I.  c.  iii.  §  8.  p.  86.  ss.  [On  the 
Canon,  p.  92.  s.]  Huet,  Demonst.  Evang.  Prop.  IV.  p.  231.  ss. 
Lamy,  Apparat.  Bibl.  p.  337. 

[a)  Grotius,  Praef.  in  lib.  Judith,  considers  it  as  an  extended  allegory, 
See  Prideaux,  Conn,  ubi  supra,  and  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  307.  anm. 

a). BuDDAEus,  Ecc.  Hist.  V.  T.  p.  618.,  after  Luther  ;  Semler, 

Abhandlungen  von  freyer  Unlersuchung  des  Kanons,  III.  Th.  S.  120.  ff. : 


028  PARTICULAR  liNTRODUCTION  TO  EACH    BOOK 

Bertholdt,  S.  2550.  ff.,  and  De  Wette,  ubi  supra,  are  of  opinioi; 
that  the  book  is  a  political  and  moral  fiction.     Tr.J 

[6)  So  SAirnBi;ECHi.ER,  Erlauterungen  der  biblischen  Gesdhichte, 
f.  Th.  S.  369—383.] 

§  246.     Age  of  the  Book  of  Judith. 

The  author  of  the  book  is  unknown  ;  it  merely  appears  from  the 
narrative,  that  he  wrote  in  the  age  of  the  Maccabees, [a]  in  order  to 
inspire  the  Jews  with  courage  to  resist  the  Syrians.  The  pi-actice 
observed  throughout  the  work,  of  making  set  speeches  in  the  Gre- 
cian style,  agrees  with  that  period,  and  proves  that  the  author  lived  at 
a  time  when,  as  was  the  case  in  that  of  the  Maccabees,  the  Hebrews 
were  acquainted  with  Grecian  literature.  Besides,  c.  viii.  6.,  the 
ifpodaQ^arov  and  -TrpoviSfjOTjviov  are  mentioned,  both  of  v/hich  belong  to  a 
modern  age.  The  circumcision  of  Achior  is  not  indeed  at  variance 
with  an  ancient  date,  but  it  suits  a  modern  one  better. 

[a)  Bertholdt,  S.  2564,  places  it  as  low  as  the  time  of  the  war  with 
the  Romans.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  }  307.  anm.  c),  considers  it  impossi- 
ble to  fix  the  date  of  the  book.     TV.] 

§  247.     Language  of  the  Book  of  Judith. 

The  imitation  of  the  Grecian  practice  of  introducing  orations  into 
the  history  renders  it  probable,  that  the  author  used  the  Greek  lan- 
guage. This  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  there  are  no  instances  of 
readings,  the  origin  of  which  must  necessarily  be  traced  to  the  He- 
brew or  Chaldee.  Origen,  moreover,  declares  in  his  epistle  to  Afri- 
canus,  that  nothing  had  ever  been  heard  of  any  Hebrew  text.  Je- 
rome, it  is  true,  had  a  Chaldee  copy,  but  there  is  no  proof  that  it  was 
hot  a  translation  from  the  Greek. 

§  248.     Versions  of  the  Book  of  Judith. 

Jerome,  Praef.  in  Judith,  writes  thus  :  "  The  book  of  Judith  is 
reckoned  by  the  Hebrews  among  the  hagiographa,  the  authority  of 
which  they  deem  insufficient  to  decide  any  controverted  points.  Yet 
being  written  in  the  Chaldee  language  they  consider  it  as  one  of 
their  histories.     But  as  we  read  that  this  book  was  reckoned  by  the 


OK    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  529 

Nicene  Council  in  the  number  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures, [a]  I  have 
acquiesced  in  your  request,  or  rather  demand,  and  laying  aside  my 
other  occupations,  with  which  I  was  greatly  pressed,  I  have  devoted 
one  evening  to  this  translation,  rather  rendering  sense  for  sense,  than 
word  for  word.  The  very  corrupt  various  readings  which  occur  in 
many  manuscripts  I  have  left  out,  translating  into  Latin  only  that 
which  I  found  in  a  complete  sense  in  the  Chaldee  text."  The  ver- 
sion thus  made  is  that  of  the  Vulgate.  Jerome  having  acquired  only 
a  very  imperfect  knowledge  of  Chaldee,  at  an  advanced  age,  as  he 
himself  acknowledges,  Praef.  in  Dan.,  must  certainly  have  made  use 
of  a  Jewish  interpreter,  or  else  he  only  occasionally  compared  the^ 
Chaldee  with  the  Greek  text.  His  version  differs  considerably  from 
the  Greek,  a  circumstance  which  perhaps  arose  from  the  simultane- 
ous use  of  the  Greek  and  Chaldee  texts,  and  is  alluded  to  by  Jerome 
when  he  speaks  of  having  left  out  the  corrupt  various  readings  of 

manuscripts, There  is  extant  another  older  Latin  version  made 

from  the  Greek  text,  yet  constantly  differing  from  it ;  which  fact  con- 
firms the  statement  of  Jerome,  that  there  existed  a  corrupt  variety  in 
the  manuscripts.      Some  have  thought  that  this  version  has  been 

mixed  along  with  that  of  Jerome.  [&] The  Syriac  version  is  of  an 

unknown  age,  but  follows  the  Greek  more  closely  than  the  others,  so 
that  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  was  made  from  that  text. 

■"a)  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  no  such  admission  is  found  in  the  Acts 
of  that  council,  no  mention  of  the  Book  of  Judith  occurring  in  them.] 

\b)  This  opinion  is  advanced  by  Jahn  himself  in  his  German  work, 
where  he  supposes  the  mixture  to  have  been  made  during  the  middle 
ages.     TV.] 


67 


530     PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 


CHAPTER  VI. 


OF   THE    BOOK   OP   ECCLESIASTICCS,    OR    THE    WISDOM   OF   JESUS 
THE    SON    OF   SIRACH. 


§  249.     Age  of  Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach. 

'J'here  is  no  sufficient  evidence  to  determine  who  Jesus  the  son 
of  Sirach  was  ;  but  the  age  in  which  he  hved  may  be  inferred  from  the 
age  of  the  Greek  translator,  who  in  his  preface  declares  himself  his 
grandson,  telhng  his  readers  that  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  he  had 
translated  the  Hebrew  book  of  his  grandfather  into  Greek,  in  Egypt, 
under  Ptolemy  Euergetes.  There  were,  however,  two  Ptolemies 
surnamed  Euergetes,  ike  first  of  whom  reigned  from  246  B.  C.  to 
221,  and  the  other  from  146  to  116.  The  common  opinion  is,  that 
the  latter,  vi^ho  was  also  called  Physcon,  and  Kakergetes,  is  the  one 
intended,  since  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach  praises  a  Simon,  whom  they 
suppose  to  be  Simon  the  Second,  the  son  of  Onias  II.  This  would 
make  Jesus  to  have  written  under  or  just  after  this  Simon  II.,  who 
was  high  priest  from  217  to  195  B.  C,  and  hence  it  would  follow 
that  his  grandson  must  have  translated  his  book  under  Ptolemy  Phys- 
con.  The  ''  thirty-eighth  year,"  refers  to  the  age  of  the  transla- 
tor, not,  as  many  suppose,  to  the  reign  of  the  monarch  under  whom 
he  wrote  ;  for  Euergetes  I.  reigned  only  twenty-four  years,  and  Euer- 
getes II.  only  twenty-nine.  The  notices  occasionally  given  by  Jesus 
of  his  condition,  and  of  the  vicissitudes  which  he  had  undergone- 
agree  well  enough  with  the  age  of  Simon  II.  But  this  date  is  ren- 
dered doubtful  by  the  praises  which  are  bestowed  upon  Simon,  in 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  531 

ti.  1.  1 — 21.,  where  he  is  said  to  liave  been  a  most  prudent  and  grave 
man,  which  was  not  the  character  of  Simon  II.  but  of  Simon  I.,  sur- 
named  the  Just,  a  very  celebrated  man,  who  is  said  to  have  completed 
the  Canon,  and  exercised  the  office  of  high  priest  from  300  B.  C.  to 
292  B.  C.  This  would  make  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach  to  have  pub- 
lished his  book  in  the  interval  of  time  which  elapsed  between  292 
B.  C.  and  280.  This  age  agrees  not  only  with  all  that  the  author 
says  in  relation  to  himself  and  his  various  fortunes,  but  also  with  his 
use  of  the  Hebrew  language,  and  the  ignorance  of  Grecian  affairs 

which  the  work   exhibits. The  grandson,  therefore,  must  have 

translated  the  book  into  Greek  under  Ptolemy  Euergetes  I.,  some- 
time between  246  and  221  B.  C.  The  interval  of  time  between 
this  date  and  that  in  which  his  grandfather  wrote,  answers  exactly 
to  the  two  generations  which  intervened  between  the  grandfather 
and  his  grandson.  Comp.  Germ.  Introd.  P.  II.  Sect.  IV.  §  249'. 
p.  927—932. 

1.  The  additional  preface  to  this  book  which  is  printed  in  the  Com- 
plutensiati  Polyglot,  and  has  been  republished  by  Linde,  in  his  edition 
of  the  Sentences  of  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach,  1795,  Gedan,  seems  to  be  a 
fragment  of  the  synopsis  of  the  Pseudo-Athanasius,  and  contains  nothing 
more  than  a  conjecture  respecting  the  name  of  the  translator,  and  a  no- 
tice of  the  subjects  treated  of  in  the  work  itself. 

2.  Ben  Sira,  the  author  of  the  Hebrew  Sentences  published  by  Fagius, 
is  not  our  Jesus  the  son  of  Sirach.  This  appears  plainly  from  the  differ- 
ence of  the  style,  and  of  the  sententious  sayings,  which  although  some- 
times the  same  in  our  book  as  in  that  under  the  name  of  Ben  Sira,  are 
yet  more  generally  different. [a] 

[a)  See  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  319,  for  a  fuller  discussion  of  this 
subject.     Tr.] 

§  250.     Contents  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiasticus. 

The  son  of  Sirach  has  imitated  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  at  the 
same  time  adding  many  things  which  are  not  to  be  found  there,  and 
always  treating  his  subject  in  a  more  diffuse  manner,  yet  without 
exhausting  it.  [a]  His  sententious  observations,  like  those  of  Solo- 
mon, are  drawn  from  experience.     They  are  not  indeed  to  be  ap- 


.'332         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH     BOOK 

plied  without  any  limitation,  for  many  of  them  express  no  more  than 
what  generally  takes  place  ;  nevertheless,  when  properly  understood, 
they  are  of  the  greatest  utility,  and  are  therefore  very  often  used  by 
the  apostle  James  in  his  epistle. 

The  book  may  be  divided  into  three  parts.  [6]  1)  Chap,  i — xliii. 
contains  a  commendation  of  wisdom,  and  precepts  for  the  regulation 
of  hfe,  which  are  adapted  to  persons  of  all  classes  and  conditions 
and  of  every  age  and  sex.  The  author  discusses  some  topics  more 
frequently  than  others,  and  furnishes  additional  precepts,  for  he  pre- 
pared the  book  during  a  considerable  space  of  time,  in  the  course  of 
which  new  observations  on  the  same  subject  occasionally  occurred, 

as  he  freely  acknowledges.     See  c.  xxx.  or  xxxiii.  16. 2)  In  c. 

xliv — 1.  the  author  celebrates  the  patriarchs  and  other  distinguished 

men  among  the  ancients. 3)  In  c.  h.  the  work  concludes  with  a 

prayer  or  hymn  of  the  author,  and  an  exhortation  to  the  pursuit 
of  wisdom. 

1.  GoTTL.  SoNNTAG,  ill  Lis  Commentatio  de  Jesu  Siracidae  Ecclesias- 
tico,  non  libro  sed  libri  farragine,  1792,  has  endeavoured  to  show  that  the 
book  which  we  have  is  an  imperfect  work,  containing  only  materials  for 
a  larger  one,  and  that  these  have  fallen  into  confusion  and  disorder.  This 
lie  attempts  to  prove  from  the  diversity  of  the  style.  But  since  observa- 
tions of  the  kind  contained  in  this  work  could  only  have  been  written 
during  a  long  course  of  time,  as  opportunities  of  making  them  occurred, 
the  author  must  necessarily  have  returned  to  his  unfinished  work  at  dif- 
ferent times  with  various  feelings,  and  that  this  should  produce  a  variety 
of  style  is  not  at  all  extraordinary. 

2.  They  who  censure  the  author  for  not  mentioning  the  Messiah,  do 
not  consider,  that  the  prayer  in  c.  xxxvi.  13 — 17,  for  the  accomplishment 
of  the  promises,  and  the  hope  expressed  in  c.  xliv.  21 — 23,  do  both  com- 
prehend the  expectation  of  his  coming.  An  express  mention  of  the  Mes- 
siah in  a  work  relating  to  morals,  would  have  been  irrelative. 

[a)  The  following  illustrations  of  the  copious  and  connected  method 
of  treatment  in  this  work,  compared  with  the  book  of  Proverbs,  are 
given  by  De  Wette,  Einleit.  {  317.  anm.  b)  :  c.  xii.  8 — xiii.  26.;  xv. 
11_20.;  xvi.  26— -xvii.  16.;  xxiii.  16—26.;  xxvi.  1—18.;  xxix.  1—19.; 
xxx.  1 — 12.;  xxxvii.  27 — xxxviii.  15.;  xxxviii.  24 — xxxix.  II.  He 
notices  a  particular  resemblance  between  c.  i — ix.  xxiv.  and  Prov. 
i— ix.     Tr.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMKM .  533 

[b)  This  arrangement  receives  the  approbation  of  Dk  Wettk,  Ein- 
ifiit.  ^  317.  anm.  d),  who  rejects  the  hypothetical  division  of  Eichhorn, 
Einleit.  in  d.  Apok.  Biich.  S.  30.  ff.,  by  which  that  author  endeavours  to 
account  for  the  transposition  of  c.  xxx — xxxiii.  in  the  Vulgate.     TV.] 

§  251.     Versions  of  Ecclesiasticus. 

The  Hebrew  text  of  this  book  was  extant  in  the  time  of  Jerome, 
for  in  his  Preface  to  the  books  of  Solomon  he  tells  us  that  he  had 
seen  it,  and  that  it  did  not  bear  the  name  of  Ecclesiasticus,  as  the 
Latins  called  it,  but  that  of  Parables,  (d'Wo,)  and  was  joined  with 

Ecclesiastes  and  Canticles.  It  is  much  to  be  lamented  that  Jerome 
did  not  translate  it  into  Latin.  Our  Vulgate  version  is  more  ancient 
than  his  time,  and  was  made  from  the  Greek  text,  from  which  how- 
ever it  frequently  differs,  and  not  only  contains  some  additions,  but 
presents  what  is  included  in  xxx.  25 — xxxiii.  16.  after  xxxiii.  15,  and 

has  thus  produced  a  different  arrangement  of  the  chapters. The 

Greek  text  itself  contains  many  proofs  that  it  is  a  translation  from 
the  Hebrew,[a]  into  which  language  it  may,  in  consequence,  be  ren- 
dered with  the  greatest  ease.  There  is  no  probability  in  the  conjec- 
ture advanced  by  the  Pseudo-Athanasius,  that  the  51st  chapter  is  an 
addition  of  the  translator.  But  very  considerable  differences  exist  in 
the  Greek  Manuscripts,  so  that  it  would  seem  that  occasional  omis- 
sions or  additions  have  been  made  by  the  readers  or  transcribers. 

The  Syriac  version  in  the  London  Polyglot  contains  sometimes  more 
and  sometimes  less  than  the  Greek  ;  still  it  may  have  been  made 
from  it.  Bendtsen,  however,  in  his  Exercitationes  Criticae,*  con- 
tends that  it  was  derived  from  the  Hebrew  text,  and  labours  to  esta- 
blish this  from  readings,  which  could  not  have  arisen  except  from  the 
Hebrew  language.  His  proofs  are  not  sufficient  to  settle  the  point,  [ft] 

The  Syriac  Hexaplar.  manuscript  which  is  preserved  at  Milan, 

contains  the  book  of  Ecclesiasticus  in  that  language,  but  it  has  not 

yet  been  examined. The  Arabic  version  in  the  London  Polyglot 

agrees  with  the  Syriac  in  some  particular  readings,  and  appears  to 
])ave  been  made  from  it. 

*  [Specimen  excrcitationum  criticarum  in  Veteris  Testamenti  libros  apocrypbos  c 
scriptis  Patrum  ct  antiquis  versionibus,  Gottingae,  1788.] 


534    PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

[a)  See  De  Wette,  Einleit.  $  318.  anm.  a).     TV.] 

[b)  Sabatier,  Bibl.  Lat.  Vers,  antiq.  T.  II.  p.  390.;  Bengel,  iiber 
die  muthmassliche  Quelle  der  alten  lateinischen  Uebersetzung  des  Buchs 
Sirach  in  Eichhorn's  AUg.  Bibl.  VII.  Th.  S.  832.  ff.;  and  Bertholdt, 
S.  2304.  flF.,  agree  with  Bendtsen.  Eichhorn,  Einleit.  S.  84.,  and 
Bretschnbider,  Excurs.  I.  ad  libr.  Jes.  Sir.  p.  699.  ss.,  suppose  it  de- 
rived from  a  corrupt  Greek  text.  De  Wette,  Einleit.  $  320,  leaves 
the  matter  undecided.     TV.] 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  535 


CHAPTER  VII, 


OF   THE   BOOK   OF   WISDOM. 


§  252.     Contents. 

As  Jesus,  the  son  of  Sirach,  imitated  in  some  measure  the  Pro- 
verbs of  Solomon,  so  also  the  author  of  the  book  of  Wisdom  imitated 
Ecclesiastes.  In  this  way  he  even  introduces  Solomon  speaking. 
The  book  consists  of  two  parts.  1 )  In  c.  i — ix.  wisdom  is  re- 
commended to  all,  and  especially  to  kings,  in  order  that  they  may 
labour  to  acquire  it  with  the  more  earnestness,  in  proportion  to  the 
facility  of  securing  it,  and  to  the  abundance  of  the  recompense  with 
which  it  rewards  those  who  seek  it.  Even  if  they  should  happen  to 
be  oppressed  by  adversity  in  the  present  life,  yet  in  the  future,  wis- 
dom will  render  them  happy,  while  on  the  contrary  foolish  and  wicked 
men  are  miserable  now,  and  will  be  more  so  hereafter.  (This  is  the 
first  time  that  a  future  Hfe  of  happiness  or  misery  is  expressly  men- 
tioned.) This  part  may  be  separated  into  three  sections.  In  c.  i— 
vi.  wisdom  and  folly  are  represented  according  to  their  consequences ; 
in  c.  vii.  and  viii.  Solomon  states  the  methods  by  which  he  had  sought 
and  found  wisdom ;  and  c.  ix.  contains  a  prayer  of  Solomon  for  ob- 
taining wisdom. 2)   In  c.  x — xix.  the  happiness  which  wisdom 

imparts,  and  the  wretchedness  into  which  folly,  and  particularly  ido- 
latry plunges  its  votaries,  are  illustrated  by  examples  taken  from  his- 
tory. In  this  part  two  sections  are  distinguishable  ;  c.  x — xii.  con- 
taining examples  of  persons  remarkable  for  wisdom  or  folly  ;  and  c. 
xiii — xix.  comprising  various  observations  in  praise  of  the  ardent  pur- 
suit of  wisdom. 


536  PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK 

§  233.     Language  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom. 

This  book  was  originally  written  in  Greek,  for  the  style,  as  Jerome 
has  observed  in  his  Preface  to  the  books  of  Solomon,  partakes  of  the 
Grecian  eloquence.  The  Hebraisms  which  occasionally  occur,  only 
prove  that  the  author  was  a  Hebrew,  and  resembled  his  countrymen, 
who  scarcely  ever  wrote  the  Greek  language  in  its  purity.  The 
readings  which  Faber  (Programm,  5 — 8.  in  Lib.  Sap.)  has  adduced 
to  prove  a  Hebrew  origin  can  be  better  explained  on  other  grounds. 
R.  Moses  Ben  Nachman  mentions  a  Hebrew  text  which  he  had  seen  ; 
but  this  was  nothing  more  than  a  Syriac  version  written  in  Hebrew 
letters,  [a] 

[a)  Nachtigall,  Uebers.  des  B.  Weisheit,  S.  24.  f.  considers  the 

Greek  text  as  a  translation  from  either  the  Hebrew  or  the  Chaldee. 

EicHnoRN,  S.  194.  flF.,  Bertholdt,  S.  2280.  flf.,  De  Wette,  Einleit. 
^  313,  and  Hasse,  Uebers.  des  B.  Weisheit,  S.  192  flf,  agree  with 
Jahn.     TV.] 

§  264.      The  Author  and  Age  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom. 

Tlie  Greek  language  in  which  the  work  is  written,  and  many  mo- 
dern ideas  which  it  contains,  show  plainly  that  it  is  not  only  much 
more  recent  than  the  time  of  Solomon,  to  whom  it  is  ascribed,  but 
also  than  that  of  Zerubbabel,  whom  Faber,  in  his  8th  Program,  1776 
— 1787,  considers  as  the  author,  and  supposes  that,  as  in  the  book  of 
Ecclesiastes,[a]  Solomon  is  merely  introduced  as  a  speaker.  The 
author  of  the  book  is  unknown.  Jerome  indeed  tells  us,  in  his  Pre- 
face to  the  books  of  Solomon,  that  some  of  the  ancients  affirmed  it  to 
be  the  production  of  Philo  the  Jew.  But  if  they  meant  the  Philo 
whose  works  are  still  extant,  they  were  entirely  mistaken,  for  the  work 
is  not  written  in  his  style  ;  and  if  they  referred  to  some  older  writer  of 
•the  same  name>  he  is  altogether  unknown  to  us.  There  is  not  suffi- 
cient evidence  to  enable  us  to  determine  even  the  date  of  the  book 
with  accuracy  ;  this  only  is  clear,  that  in  the  age  in  which  the  author 
lived  the  Hebrews  were  well  acquainted  with  the  Grecian  philosophy, 
and  therefore  it  would  seem  that  the  book  must  have  been  written  at 
the  end  of  the  second  or  the  beginning  of  the  first  century  before 
Christ.     The  places  which  urge  wisdom  upon  the  attention  of  kings, 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  i)37 

and  those  which  mention  the  persecutions  of  the  son  or  friend  of  God, 
xviii.  13.  (i.  e.  the  Jewish  people,)  appear  to  indicate  the  age  of  An- 

tiochus  Epiphanes. Those  who  have  brought  down  the  date  of 

the  book  to  some  time  after  Christ,  have  advanced  no  arguments 
Which  merit  refutation. The  conjecture  that  it  has  been  interpo- 
lated by  Christia  ^  i:-  unded  almost  entirely  upon  doctrinal  grounds, 
on  the  mere  assumption  that  such  doctrines  as  it  contains  were  not  to 
be  expected  from  a  Jew. 

There  are  some  persons  who  consider  the  second  part  (c.  x — xix.) 
as  a  separate  work,  and  suppose  it  to  have  been  written  by  a  different 
author,  or  else  by  the  same  in  the  earher  part  of  his  life.  [6]  But 
they  have  not  been  able  to  establish  their  opinion  by  solid  arguments. 
nor  have  they  noticed  the  connexion  between  the  ninth  and  tenth 
chapters.  The  difference  of  style  which  is  urged  may  be  traced  to 
the  nature  of  the  subject,  which  is  different  in  the  second  part  from 
that  of  the  first,  [c]  It  is  not  true,  as  has  been  supposed,  that  Solomon 
does  not  speak  in  the  second  part,  for  if  no  express  assertion  to  that 
eflfect  occurs,  it  ought  to  be  considered  that  sk  ither  is  there  any  such 

assertion  in  the  first  part,  except  in   c.  ix.  7,  8,  12. Lastly,  the 

argument  founded  on  the  difference  of  ideas  and  doctrines  in  the  two 
parts,  to  which  much  importance  has  been  attached,  is  too  far-fetched, 
and  is  refuted  by  the  fact,  that  very  many  of  these  ideas  and  doctrines 
do  occur  in  both  parts.  For  instance,  that  remarkable  appellation 
"the  son  of  God,"  applied  to  his  people  in  xviii.  13.,  (E-ri  tw  twv 
ir^uTOToxuv  oXs&^cd  wjxoXo^'iitfav  Qsa  'uiov  Xaov  tfvai,)  has  a  manifest  re- 
ference to  the  '  son  of  God'  mentioned  in  ii.  18.,  viz.  the  man  that 
honours  him,  of  whom  it  is  said,  that  he  will  be  persecuted  even  to 
death.     See  Germ.  Introd.  p.  944 — 947. 

If  the  contents  of  the  book  had  been  produced  by  assemblies  of  the 
learned,  which  Nachtigal  thinks  he  discovers  every  where,  the  cha- 
racter and  style  of  its  language  would  have  varied  more  ;  not  to  say, 
that  these  assemblies  are  altogether  fictitious. 

[a)  Comp.  ^  214.  notes.    TV.] 

\b)  HouBiGANT,  Proleg.  in  Sac.  Script.  P.  II,  makes  c.  x.  begin  a  book 

distinct  from  the  preceding  part. Eichhorw,  S.  144.  ff.  makes  c.  xi. 

2.  the  commencement  of  a  separate  work.  Bretschneider  concludes 
the  first  part  with  the  end  of  c.  xi.     De  Wette,  Einl.  ^  313,  and  Ber- 

G8 


.^38         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

THOLDT,  Th.  V.  S.  2259.  ff.  agree  with  Jahn,  and  refute  these  variou? 

hypotheses. Bretschneider,  Diss,  de  libri  Sapientiae  parte  priore 

c.  i — xi.  e  duobus  libellis  diversis  conflata,  Viteb.  1804,  and  Engel- 
T5RECHT,Librum  Sapientia  Salomonis  vulgo  inscriptum  interpretandi  spe- 
cimen I.  et  II.  Hafnim,  1816,  even  subdivide  the  first  part  at  vi.  8,  consi- 
dering this  as  a  separate  work.  See  De  Wette,  ubi  supra, 
anm.  c.)     TV.] 

[c)  Besides,  De  Wette  shows,  ^  313,  anm.  d)  that  there  is  no  real  dif- 
ference between  the  styles  of  the  two  parts.     Tr.] 

§  255.      Versions  of  the  Book  of  Wisdom. 

The  Latin  Vulgate  version  is  of  higher  antiquity  than  Jerome.     It 
expresses  the  Greek  text  word  for  word,  and  is  therefore  occasionally 

unintelligible. The  Arabic  version  in  the  London  Polyglot  is  of 

an  unknown  age,  and  it  also  follows  the  Greek  text  closely. The 

Syriac  version  in  the  same  Polyglot  exhibits  the  Greek  text  in  the 
beginning  with  accuracy,  but  afterwards  it  becomes  more  neghgent. 
The  readings  of  this  version  which  Faber  has  adduced  to  prove  that 
it  was  made  from  a  Chaldee  text,  are  in  part  errors  of  transcribers 
and  of  the  press,  in  part  paraphrastic  renderings,  and  in  part  suscep- 
tible of  better  explanations  on  the  supposition  of  their  being  transla- 
tions from  the  Greek. 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT. 


,539 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


OF    THE    FIRST    TWO   BOOKS    OF   THE    MACCABEEs 


§  256.     Of  the  name  Maccabees. 

_  It  is  very  evident  from  I  Mac.  ii.  4.,  that  the  sons  of  Mattathias 
had  each  his  own  proper  surname,  and  that  Judas  alone  was  called 
Maccabeus,  6  iiaxxa(3aiog.  Afterwards  this  appellation  was  extended 
to  all  who  in"  the  second  century  before  Christ  contended  for  their 
religion  and  country,   and  thus  the  title  of  these  and  certain  other 

books  originated. The  name  was  formerly  supposed  to  have  been 

formed  from  the  initial  letters  of  the  words  mn"'  D'^XJ  -"JIDD  'D,  who 

is  like  unto  thee  among  the  gods,  O  Jehovah,  or  whan  buD  '0,  who 

is  like  God  among  the  gods,  which  were  thought  to  have  been  em- 
broidered on  the  standards  of  the  Jews  during  their  wars  with  the 
Syrians,  and  to  have  been  contracted  into  one  word  'JDD  or  nUD. 
But  if  this  were  the  origin  of  the  term,  it  should  have  been  written 
}jLa5(a/3aio(,  whereas  it  is  constantly  written  ffcaxjca/Saioi,  as  if  derived 
from  n3j5D,  a  hammer,  ''3pD,  a  hammerer,  a  surname  given  to  Judas,  as 

formerly  to  Charles  Martel,  in  consequence  of  his  heroic  actions. 

/     /  / 
In  Arabic  also  the  word  t^     aV^  signifies  not  only  to  perforate  a  tvall, 

hxii  d\^o  to  he  prince  or  chief  of  the  people,  2LnAh.ence  \.,./y^JlJ  means 

a  prince  of  the  people.  This  is  the  way  in  which  the  term  was  ex- 
plained by  Isidore  of  Pelusium,  who  compared  the  word  ^a.-KxaQmng 


jiO  PARTICLLAR     INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    BOOK 

with  the  Persian  xoi^avoj,  which  in  an  unpublished  Etymologicon  ib 
explained  by  Ssg-jforris,  master.  The  same  thing  is  expressed  by  the 
Hebrew  or  Chaldee  title  of  the  book,  as  cited  by  Origan  in  Eusebius, 
Hist,  Eccles.   VI.  25.,  tfa^/3ar  (fa^fSsvs  sX,  ^x  'i2  ^V  nSltS^,  history 

of  the  prince  of  the  sons  (or  worshippers)  of  God ;  where  lunxxa^auis, 
is  made  equivalent  to  prince.[a] 

The  Maccabees  are  called  also  by  Josephus,  Ant.  XII.  vi.  1.,  ^smo- 
nmans,  or  Hastnonxans^  a  term  which  most  probably  has  its  origin  in  the 
family  name  Asmon  or  Hashmon,  p'DB'n.[6]     But  some  derive  it  from 

0        ^  / 
DB?n,  because  among  the  Arabians     -^A^AAA^ik.   means  a  man  of  muck 

service;  [c]  this  however  seems  to  bs  very  far-fetched. 

[a)  Comp.  MiCHAKLis,  Or.  Bibl.  Th.  XII.  S.  112.,  and  De  Wette, 

Einleit.  $  299.  anm.  c). For  the  various  opinions  which  have  been 

maintained  respecting  the  origin  of  the  name,  see  Letdecker  de  Re- 
publica  Hebraeorum,  Lib.  VIII.  Cap.  I.  p.  580,  Amstel.  1710,  and  Duusn 
explicatio  tituli,  prefixed  to  his  Notes  on  the  first  book  of  Maccabees  in 

the  Critici  Sacri,  Tom.  V.  p.  50. That  the  application  of  the  epithet 

"  the  hammerer,"  to  a  conquering  ruler,  would  not  be  incongruous  with 
Oriental,  and  especially  with  Hebrew  usage,  is  proved  by  Jer.  1.  23., 
where  U''t23  is  similarly  applied.     Comp.  also  Jer.  li.  20.     TV.] 

[6)  So  JosEPHus  Ben  Gorion  calls  them  UIDtyn  'JD»  and  'J" 
"NilOlt'n,  p.  66,  159,  443.  ed.  Breithaupt.     Tr.] 

[c)  So  Eichhorn,  S.  217,  referring  to  the  use  of  jDti'n  in  Ps.  Ixviii. 
32.     Tr.] 

§  257.     Contents  of  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  who  had  seized  the  kingdom  of  Syria  in  the 
year  137  of  the  €ra  of  the  Greeks,  or  of  contracts,  (175  B.  C),  in 
the  year  143  of  the  same  era  (169  B.  C.)  returning  from  his  second 
expedition  into  Egypt,  plundered  Jerusalem,  slew  many  of  the  Jews, 
made  many  of  them  prisoners,  and  spoiled  and  profaned  their  temple. 
Purposing  acts  of  still  greater  atrocity,  in  the  145th  year  of  the  era 
of  contracts  (B.  C.  167),  upon  his  return  from  his  fourth  expedition 
into  Egypt,  he  issued  orders  to  put  to  death  all  the  citizens  of  Jerri- 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  541 

salem,  to  raze  the  walls,  and  to  fortify  the  castle  of  Zion ;  he  even 
proceeded  to  such  extremities  as  to  command  all  the  inhabitants  of 
his  kingdom  to  embrace  his  own  religion.     Officers  appointed  by  the 
king  were  despatched  to  Judea,  in  order  to  force  the  Jews  to  wor- 
ship idols ;  and  to  punish  with  death  all  who  should  refuse.     One  of 
these  officers  having  gone  to  the  city  Modem,  was  resisted  by  Matta- 
thias,  a*  priest  of  the  twenty-fourth  course,  which  derived  its  name 
from  Joiarib.     This  courageous  man,  with  his  five  sons,  assembled 
the  Jews  who  persevered   in   the   religion  of  their  ancestors,   and 
marcliing  through  the  country  put  to  death  not  only  the  Jewish  apos- 
tates but  also  the  royal  officers,  and  called  upon  his  countrymen  to 
repel  force  by  force.     Upon  his  death,  which  took  place  in  the  year 
of  the  era  of  contracts  146  (B.  C.  166),  his  son  Judas  Maccab?eus 
was  appointed  conductor  of  the  war,  c.  i.  ii.,  and,  with  his  few  com- 
panions, destroyed  immense  armies  of  the  Syrians.     He  was  slain  in 
battle  ia  the  year  of  the  era  of  contracts  162  (B.  C.  160),  iii.  1 — 
viii.  27.,  and  the  Jews  substituted  in  his  place  his  brother  Jonathan, 
who  discharged  the  duties  of  his  office  fourteen  years,  and  at  length 
fell  a  victim  to  the  perfidy  of  the  enemy  in  the  year  170  of  the  same 
era  (B.  C.  142),  viii.  28 — xii.  53.     He  was  succeeded  by  the  eldest 
son  of  Mattathias,  Simon,  who  shortly  after  received  from  the  people 
the  dignity  of  prince,  and  that  of  high  priest  by  hereditary  right. 
After  he  had  conducted  the  affairs  of  the  nation  with  great  ability, 
he  was  treacherously  slain  by  his  son-in-law  Ptolemy  in  the  seventh 
year  of  his  government,  in  the  year  of  the  era  of  contracts  177 
(B.  C.  135),  c.  xiii.— xvi.[a] 

[a)  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  299,  characterizes  this  history  as  "  partly 
unsatisfactory  on  account  of  its  brevity,  faulty,  (i.  6.  viii.  7.)  uncritical, 
(xii.)  and  tending  to  exaggeration,  but  yet  on  the  whole  very  deserving 
of  credit,  sufficiently  attentive  to  chronological  accuracy,  and  superior 
to  the  other  historical  productions  of  its  age."     TV.] 

§  258.     Date  of  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees. 

In  I  Mac.  xvi.  23.  the  acts  of  John  Hyrcanus,  who  succeeded  his 
father  Simon,  are  said  to  have  been  inserted  in  the  annals  or  chronicles 
of  his  priesthood.     From  this  declaration  it  is  with  reason  inferred^ 


542         PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION  TO    EACH    BOOK 

that  the  work  in  question  was  written  either  during  the  last  years  of 
that  prince,  or  after  his  death  which  took  place  in  the  year  106  B.  C. 
The  inconsiderable  knowledge  which  it  displays  of  the  Romans,  (in 
c.  viii.),  is  at  variance  with  a  more  modern  date  ;  for  in  the  century 
immediately  preceding  the  birth  of  Christ  the  Jews  were  much  better 
acquainted  with  that  nation.  The  author  has  left  no  vestige  of  him- 
self. It  is  evident,  however,  from  the  declaration  already  liie'htioned 
relating  to  the  actions  of  John  Hyrcanus  and  from  the  remark  made 
in  ix.  21.  (22.)  in  reference  to  those  of  Judas,  (which,  it  is  said, 
were  not  all  written,)  that  he  had  drawn  from  annals  contemporane- 
ous with  the  events.  The  contents  themselves  present  sufiicient  evi- 
dence that  the  author  made  an  unexceptionable  use  of  his  authorities. 

§  259.     Language  of  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees. 

Jerome  (Prolog.  Galeat.)  asserts  that  he  found  the  first  book  of 
Maccabees  in  the  Hebrew  language,  and  Origen  gives  us,  (as  before 
stated,  §  256  )  the  Hebrew  or  Chaldee  title  of  the  book.  To  this 
evidence  for  the  Hebrew  origin  of  the  work  it  may  be  added,  that 
the  Greek  text  not  only  abounds  with  Hebraisms,  but  exhibits  also 
some  erroneous  translations  and  various  readings,  which  betray  their 
origin  from  a  Hebrew  text.  Compare  vi.  1.,  EXufxais  sv  ttj  ns^tfifJ* 
's'oXjff,  where  iroXi^  arises  from  the  equivocal  character  of  the  word 
riJ^D,  which  in  Chaldee  means  a  promnce,  and  in  Syriac  a  city,  in 

which  last  meaning  the  translator  has  improperly  understood  it ;  also 
xiv.  5.,  where  the   original  Hebrew  word  D-'N,  which  ought  to  have 

been  rendered  coasts,  is  explained  by  tms  vridois  &aXafftf*ig  the  islands 
of  the  sea.  Very  harsh  Hebraisms  occur  also  in  i.  16.  ii.  19,  42. 
iv.  19.  V.  40,  53,  64.     See  Germ.  Introd.  p.  965,  956.  [a] 

[a)  See  also  De  Wette,  Einleit.  ^  300,  who  agrees  with  Jahn,  and 
gives  additional  examples  of  Hebraisms  and  mistakes  of  the  Greek  trans- 
lator.    TV.] 

§  260.      Versions  of  the  First  Book  of  Maccabees. 

The  age  of  the  Greek  version  of  this  book  is  unknown.  But  a 
work,  the  contents  of  which  were  so  interesting  to  all  the  Jews,  was 
no  doubt  soon  translated  into  that  language  in  which  it  could  be  read 


UF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  543 

]jy  Hellenists.  It  is  therefore  in  the  highest  degree  probable,  that 
this  version  was  made  before  the  commencement   of  the  century 

immediately  preceding  the  birth  of  Christ. The  Vulgate  version 

was  made  before  the  time  of  Jerome,  and  from  a  Greek  text. 

That  the  Syriac  was  translated  immediately  from  the  Hebrew  is  main- 
tained with  a  multiplicity  of  arguments  by  Joiiis-  David  Michaelis  in 
his  notes  added  to  his  German  version  of  this  book  ;  but  Tren- 
delenburg, in  Eichhorn's  Repertoiium  fur  Biblisch.  und  Morgen. 
Lit.  XV.  Th.  S.  58.  ff  has  advanced  some  considerations  against  his 
hypothesis  which  are  not  to  be  disregarded  A  more  critical  exami- 
nation therefore  is  still  necessary  in  order  to  settle  this  question,  [a] 

[a)  EiCHHORjy,   Allgem.  deutsch.  Bibl.  Th.  LI.  S.  14.  flf.,  and  De 
Wette,  5  301,  consider  it  as  made  from  the  Greek.     Tr.] 

§  261.     Contents  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

The  second  book  of  Maccabees  consists  of  three  parts,  which  have 
no  connexion  with  each  other.  1)  Chap.  i.  to  the  middle  of  the  10th 
verse  contains  a  letter,  addressed  by  the  people  of  Jerusalem  and  of 
Judea  to  the  Egyptian  Hellenists,  written  in  the  year  B.  C.  123-  and 
of  the  era  of  contracts  1 88.  After  mentioning  a  previous  letter  which 
had  been  sent,  in  the  year  169  of  the  era  of  contracts  (B.  C.  143), 
relating  to  the  calamities  that  had  been  undergone,  it  informs  the 
Jews  in  Egypt  that  now  the  sacrifices  had  been  restored  and  the  feast 
of  dedication  was  kept,  and  urges  upon  them  the  celebration  of  the 

same  religious  festival. 2)  From  the  middle  of  the  tenth  verse  of 

the  first  chapter  to  the  eighteenth  of  the  second  is  contained  another 
more  ancient  letter  o£  the  inhabitants  of  Judea,  the  elders,  and  Judas 
Maccabeus,  to  the  priest  Aristobulus,  the  instructer  of  king  Ptolemy, 
and  to  the  Egyptian  Jews.  From  the  mention  of  Judas  Maccabeus, 
it  is  clear  that  this  letter  was  written  between  the  years  of  the  era  of 
contracts  149  and  153  (^B.  C.  163 — 159).  It  contains  an  account  of 
the  dangers  with  which  the  writers  had  been  threatened  by  Antiochus 
Epiphanes,  and  of  his  death,  and  admonishes  the  Jews  of  Egypt  to 
celebrate  the  feast  of  dedication  and  of  the  consecrated  fire  on  the 
25th  of  the  month  Casleu.  Of  this  consecrated  fire,  and  also  of  the 
ark  of  the  covenant,  the  holv  tabernacle,  and  the  ijolden  altar  of  in- 


•344  PARTICULAR    INTRODUCTION    TO    EACH    COOK 

cense,  some  extraordinary  things  are  related. 3)  Then  follows  in 

ii.  19 — 32,  a  preface  t6  the  book,  in  which  the  author  signifies  his 
intention  of  reducing  the  five  books  of  Jason  into  an  epitome.  He 
relates  some  more  ancient  transactions  which  prepared  the  way  for 
the  persecution  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes,  c.  iii — v.  At  last  he  re- 
counts the  exploits  of  Judas  Maccabeus,  and  concludes  the  book  with 
the  defeat  and  slaughter  of  Nicanor,  of  which  an  account  is  also  given 
in  I  Mac.  vii. 

The  two  books  of  Maccabees  ought  to  be  constantly  compared  together, 
as  they  serve  for  mutual  illustration  ;  and  therefore  in  my  German  Ar- 
chaeology, II.  Th.  I.  B.  5  93—103.  S.  402—476.,  I  have  given  the  corres- 
ponding  places.  The  differences  in  the  chronology  of  the  books  may  be 
reconciled  by  reference  to  the  different  methods  of  commencing  the  year, 
the  first  book  following  that  of  the  Babylonians,  and  reckoning  from 
jipril,  311  B.  C,  while  the  second  begins  with  October,  312  B.  C.  The 
objections  which  have  been  urged  against  this  method  of  computing  in 
these  books,  are  answered  in  a  work,  which  bears  the  title :  Auctovitas 
utriusque  Hbri  Maccabseorum,  Vienna  j^uslrm,  1749,  p.  129 — 146. 

§  262.     Difficulties  in  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

Although  this  work  supplies  some  deficiencies  in  the  history  in  the 
first  book  of  Maccabees,  yet  it  labours  under  difficulties  by  no  means 

inconsiderable. 1)  The  letters  prefixed  to  the  book  are  in  some 

respects  repugnant  to  its  contents.  For  instance,  the  second  letter 
states  that  Antiochus  Epiphanes  was  stoned  and  his  body  cut  in  pieces 
by  the  priests,  in  the  temple  of  Nanjea  in  Persepolis  ;  but  in  c.  ix.  it 
!s  related,  that  this  monarch  was  thrown  out  of  his  chariot  as  he  Was 
returnirig  froni  Persia,  attacked  by  a  disease,  and  that  his  flesh  putri- 
fied  while  he  was  yet  alive.  The  other  circumstances  mentioned  in 
this  second  letter,  relatmg  to  the  deportation  of  the  Jews,  i.  19.,  to 
the  consecrated  fire,  i.  19 — 22.  ii.  1,  4 — 8.,  and  to  the  tabernacle  of 
Moses,  the  golden  altar  of  incense,  and  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  ii. 
4^ — 8.,  are  at  variance  with  the  history  contained  in  other  parts  of  the 
Bible.  These  letters  do  not  appear  to  have  been  prefixed  by  the 
author,  who  could  not  so  plainly  contradict  himself ;  they  must  have 
been  added  by  some  other  person,  like  the  epistle  at  the  end  of  the 
book  of  Baruch.     If  it  should  be  urged,  that  the  words  Ta  Ss  at  th^ 


OF    THE    OLD    TESTAMENT.  545 

commencement  of  the  book  in  ii.  19.,  presumes  that  something  has 
preceded  them  ;  this  is  readily  answered  :  for  in  Jewish  Greek  the 
occurrence  of  Ss  in  the  beginning  of  a  discourse  is  not  a  matter  which 
need  shock  the  reader :  or  the  particle  (h  may  have  been  introduced 
by  the  person  who  prefixed  the  letters. — r-2)  The  history  of  the 
death  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  in  c.  ix.  varies  from  that  contained'  in 
I  Mac.  vi.  1 — 17.  However,  the  discrepancy  is  not  of  much  conse- 
quence, for  the  pi'incipal  fact,  the  death  of  Antiochus  in  Persia  while 
on  a  journey,  is  stated  in  both  places. 3)  The  accounts  of  appari- 
tions and  prodigies  which  are  given  in  iii.  25.  s.,  33,  34.  v.  1 — 3.  x. 
29.  s.,  xi.  8 — 10.  XV.  11.  ss.,  do  not  occur  in  the  first  book  of  Macca- 
bees, and  have  the  appearance  of  being  additions  to  the  true  history. 
The  author  seems  to  refer  to  them  when  he  says,  in  ii.  28.  and  xv. 
38.  that  he  had  left  the  investigation  of  the  several  events  and  actions 
recounted,  to  the  writer  (Jason),  and  had  confined  himself  to  what 
had  been- written  by  him.  But  these  adjectitious  circumstances  pro- 
duce no  change  in  the  facts  themselves.  See  Sandbuechler  Er- 
lauterungen  der  Biblischen  Geschichte,  1794.  I.  Th.  S.  426,  427. 

§  263.     Author  and  Age  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

The  conjectures  which  have  been  advanced  respecting  the  author 
of  this  book  are  so  unfounded,  that  it  is  best  to  confess  our  ignorance. 
The  determination  of  its  age  is  also  involved  in  diflficulties,  since  the  au- 
thor has  not  told  us  when  Jason  lived  ;  doubtless,  because  at  that  time 
he  was  a  writer  well  known.  There  is,  however,  abundant  evidence, 
arising  from  the  work  itself,  that  it  was  written  out  of  Syria,  and  some 
considerable  time  posterior  to  the  transactions  which  it  relates.  We 
shall  not  therefore  greatly  err,  if  we  place  it  before  the  middle  of  the 
century  immediately  preceding  the  Christian  era.  In  a  more  modern 
age,  a  work  of  this  kind  would  scarcely  have  obtained  readers. 

§  264.     Language  and  Versions  of  the  Second  Book  of  Maccabees. 

Jekome  has  remarked  (Prolog.  Galeat.)  that  the  second  book  of 
Maccabees  was  written  in  Greek,  which,  he  adds,  may  be  proved  from 
its  very  phraseology.*     The  Greek  of  this  work  is  pure,  and  occasion- 

*  [Quod  ex  ipsa  qiioque  phrasi  probari  potest.] 
69 


546   PARTICULAR  INTRODUCTION  TO  EACH  BOOK,  &C. 

ally  elegant,  so  that  the  Jew  who  composed  it  must  have  been  well 
acquainted  with  that  language. 

The  Latin   Vulgate  version  is  older  than  Jerome,  and  is  a  free 

translation  from  the  Greek  text. The  age  of  the  Syriac  version  in 

the  London  Polyglot  is  unknown.  It  was  made  immediately  from  the 
Greek,  although  it  does  not  always  faithfully  adhere  to  the  meaning 

of  its  original. The  Arabic  book  of  Maccabees  is  not  a  version* 

but  an  entirely  different  narrative  ;  compiled  from  our  books  of  Mac- 
cabees, and  from   Josephus,  or  from  the   treatise   relating  to  the 

Maccabees  which  is  appended  to  the  work  of  Josephus. The  Jews 

in  China  possess  two  books  of  Maccabees,  but  it  is  uncertain  whether 
they  are  the  same  as  ours  ;  it  is  suspected  by  some  that  they  are  the 
fabulous  work  which  the  Jews  at  present  read  on  the  feast  of  dedi- 
cation.    See  MicHAELis  alte  orient.  Biblioth.  Th.  V.  S.  80. 

Erasmus  Froelich,  formerly  librarian  in  the  Academy  of  Theresa 
at  Vienna,  published  in  1744,  Annales  compendiarii  regum  et  rerum 
Syriae,  nummis  veterum  illustrati,  in  folio.  In  this  work  he  admirably 
illustrated  the  history  of  the  Maccabees,  and  the  books  which  we  possess 
at  present,  and  established  the  chronology  and  certainty  of  the  accounts 
which  they  contain.  He  was  opposed  by  Ern.  Fred.  Wernsdorf  in 
his'  Prolueio  de  fontibus  historiae  Syriae  in  libris  Maccabaeorum,  Lipsia, 
1746,  4to.,  to  whom  Frolich  replied  in  a  book  entitled,  De  fontibus  his- 
toriae Syriae  in  libris  Maccabaeorum  prolusio  in  examen  vocata,  Vindo- 
bonce,  1746,  4to.  This  work  was  attacked  by  Gottl.  Werwsdorf, 
brother  of  the  former,  in  his  Commentatio  historico-critica  de  fide  histo- 
rica  Maccabaeorum,  1747,  Fratislavia,  4to.  and  was  answered  by  an  ano- 
nymous Jesuit  in  a  work  called,  Authoritas  utriusque  libri  Maccabaeorum 
canonico-historica  adserta,  Fiennoe,  1749, 4to. 


INDKX 


TEXTS  ILLUSTRATED  OK  EXPLALNED. 


Exod.  ii.  19. 

vi.l4— 19. 

14—29. 

vii,  7.     . 

xi.3.      . 

xii.  10. 

xiv.  5. 

X-.:.  36. 

xvii.  14. 

Numb.  xii.  3. 

6. 

xxi.  30. 


xxxii.  41. 

Deut.  i.  22.  s. 

ii.  10—12. 

20—24. 


iii.  9—11. 

13.  s. 

.  X.  6—9.. 
■  xxvii.  4. 
•  xxviii.  27. 
-: 49. 


148, 


Page. 
213 
216 
136 
207 
172 
207 
208 
208 
207 
126 

113,  127 

136 

191 

32 

150, 162 
128 
211 

125, 191 
191 
191 
166 
98 
125 
182 
191 

317,  318 
126 
191 
197 
191 
191 
191 
191 
191 

159,  166 

127 

84 

232 

222,  223 

224,  230.  s. 

224 


25, 


. xxi.  31.  s. 

— .  xxiv.  26. 
Judg.  i.  11.  s. 

10—15. 

20. 


xvii. 


xvm. 

1. 

30. 


Ruth  i.  17. 
I  Sam.  iii.  13. 

19.  s. 

vi.  18. 

—  19. 

viii.  3. 


160 


221 


Page. 
224 
225' 
221 
155 
231 

,  223.  ss. 
224 
221 
221 
232 
231 
232 
224 
231 
232 
22'' 
84 
221 
221 
240 
240 
99 
241 
166 
241 
241 
241 

242,  244 
242 
242 

[245.  ss. 

246 

245.  ss. 

246,  248 
245.  s.  247.  s. 
251 
126 
315 
270 

158,  161 
127 


INDEX    OF    TEXTS 


I  Sam.  viii.  16. 
xii.  11. 

, xiii.  1, 5, 19—21 

xvii.  xviii. 

— : xviii.  10. 

II  Sam.  y.  17. 
vii.  1 .  ss. 


—  viii.  18. 

—  xvii.  25. 

—  xxi. 

1—4. 

19. 

—  xxii.  1. 

—  xxiii.  20. 


XXIV. 

I  Kings  iv.  26. 

viii.  8. 

ix.  21. 

xii.  19. 

II  Kings  iv.  1 — 44. 

V.  18. 

viii.  22. 

X.  27. 

xviii.  5. 

9. 

26. 

I  Chron.  iii.  17—24 

xxvii.  23 

xxix.  29. 

II  Chron.  xxii.  2. 

' xxxii.  18 

■ xxxvi.  22 


Nehem.  viii.  9. 
— — ^  X.  2. 

xii.  1—26 

Esther  i.  3. 
19. 


ii.  8. 
-x.l. 


Job  xvi.  19. 

xix.  9. 

23—27. 

xlii.  2. 

Fsalm  viii.  5. 

ix.  20.  s. 

xi.  1. 

— • xvi.  1. 

10. 

xviii.  1. 

xxii.  16. 

^17. 

— 18. 


155 


Page. 
166 
270 
270 
158 
313 
271 
32 
271 
270 
267.  s. 
270 
155, 162 
156 
153 
268 
270 
267 
267 
267 
270 
127 
267 
267 
267 
267 
83 
46 
268 
258.  9. 
161,270 
83 
262 
262 
348 
276 
281 
281 
281.  s, 
284.  s. 
286 
285 
285 
97 
473 
467.  s. 
247 
98 
98 
155 
98 
148,  160 
156 
149 
160 
104 


.Psalm  XXV.  2. 


xxvii.  13. 
■  xxviii.  8. 
-XXX  vii.  28. 
39. 


Prov.  vii.  13—15. 

xiii.  20. 

XXV.  11. 

22. 


Canticles  iii.  6.  ss, 
viii.  6. 


146, 


Lament,  ii.  4. 

iv.  21.  s. 

Ezek.  xiv.  14,  16,  20, 
xxi.  27. 


336 


Past:, 
161 
ISri 
127 
157 
153, 164 
161 
15'ci 
158 
157,  165 
153 
146 
455.  s. 
98 
98 
98 
98 
490 
127,  155 
490.  s. 
491 
483,  487 
130 
335,  337 
350.  s. 
338 
,  359,  s 
157 
104 
339 
346 
352 
319 
353 
354 
83 
353 
157 
345 
97 
345 
97 
92 
308 
308 
84 
157 
369 
32 
540 
32 
348 
153 
471.  s. 
465 
162 


ij 


ILLUSTRATED    OR    EXPLAINED. 


Ezek.  xxviii.  .14. 
Dan.  ii,  1. 

iii.  25. 

viii.  2. 

ix.  24. 

xi. 

Hosea  vi.  5. 

X.  9. 

Joel  iii.  1 — 3. 
Amos  vii.  14. 

ix.  12. 

Jonah  i.  9. 

iv.  6. 

Micahi.  1. 

iii.  12. 

iv.  10—13. 

V.  5. 

Nahum  iii.  8—10. 
Habak.  i.  5. 
ii.  5. 


12. 


iii.  10—12, 


Zeph.  i.  13. 

ii.  8. 

14.  s. 


iii.  10. 
—  18. 


Haggai  ii.  7. 
Zech.  ix. 
xi.  7,  11. 


Page, 
404 
406 
421 
422 
410 

410.  s. 
159 
330 

•  362 
322 
148 
157 
372 

330.  s. 
310 
310 
310 

365.  s. 

99 

104 

104 

367 

230.  s. 
380 
380 
380 
380 
104 

425.  s. 
308 
431 


Zech.  xiv.  21. 
Malachi  ii.  16. 

iii.  1. 

23. 


Matth.  vi.  9. 

xii.  39.  s. 

XX vii.  9. 

Mark  ii.  26. 
xii.  26. 


Luke  iv.  16. 

vi.  38. 

xvi.  19.  ss. 

XX.  27. 

John  V.  2.       . 

xi.  50.  s. 

xix.  13. 

Acts  V.  17. 

xxi.  40. 

xxii.  2. 

xxvi.  14. 

Rom.  iii.  11—18. 

xi.  2. 

xii.  20. 

I  Cor.  xi.  24. 
Ephes.  V.  32. 

II  Tim.  iij.  14— 
James  v.  11. 
Rev.  i.  4. 

XX.  6.  14. 

xxi.  18.  ss. 


17. 


431 

436 

436 

436 

68 

375 

148 

120 

120 

119 

68 

465 

120 

83 

309 

83 

148 

83 

83 

83 

148 

120 

98 

93 

104 

36 

466 

68 

68 

521 


INDEX 


WORDS  AND  PHRASES  ILLUSTRATED. 


A  X 

Pa^^e. 

Page. 

mD-''tj':K 

346 

etyopa5"iiS 

*          * 

616 
62 
63 

Nj^Disrnmx    . 

274 

avs-n'iypaipoff 

ncTK 

•                   •                   » 

.    477.  s. 

a*oxpu(pov 

. 

42 

••  :  - 

aifog'ami 

. 

505 

ApldfAOl 

. 

218 

B  a 

apraQa, 

, 

52 

a(pavi^ofjLai 

,         , 

99 

§ilXja 

2 

ax»,  ax£« 

. 

62 

Ipn 

. 

322 

Dm3N 

• 

207 

B>n 

. 

97 

DnN 

98 

0Wi2 

. 

99 

3nx 

. 

91 

in3 

. 

97 

^! 

'?N1K^'D 

jrnn  i;;3    . 

196 

92 

nt3 

. 

98 

D'jnnN 

. 

121 

n^na 

1 

31'N       . 

465 

ti 

2e    • 

317 

J^{ 

465 

'7Tp  na, 

x'?p  na     . 

317 

iS-«     . 

101 

Us 

317 

T        • 

312 

l/^     • 

• 

n^x,  n^s 

101 

r  J 

p"?x      . 

.  67,  101 

yoiKfos 

.       , 

52 

tyi'jN 

98 

rsv£(f»ff 
7pa(pii 

• 

218 

0 

INDEX    OP   WORDS    AND    PHRASES    ILLUSTRATED. 


Page. 

Page. 

;i«jn 

64 

xn 

nnj  nbj 

179 

Osj:;?!'^ 

97 

V^n  n!iSi 

A  T 

.    247.  s. 

D-in 

• 

97 
377 

97 

ASUTSpOVOJXOS 

6iad7]xri 

• 

218 
1,2 

nrh 

• 

307,312 

pn      . 

• 

251 

{nn 

• 

307,317 

nn 

. 

179 

Di'7n    . 

317 

p:^  • 

E  n 

404 

mon 

. 

317 
425 

minn  'Vfmn 

nu'Dn 

218 

l^paioj 

63 

-    ••  = 

r      •   -: 

gXXiivixos 

, 

63 

Tjan     . 

• 

92 

E|o5os 

218 

<5      .  ^ 

:'jn     . 

• 

92 

jvAt/^^X^^  * 

»40 

r" 

92 

\mm 

• 

540 

vain 

97 

UVQ 

T  £3 

377 

nan 

242 

-- 

Q'Dya 

. 

114 

nnDn 

196 

DnDi3tD 

365 

xD'jrDn 

. 

412 

•  :  :  - 

N3:n 

312 

I   ^ 

..  T  • 

masn 

118 

nin'  iDK' 

358 

a'K'pn 

. 

97 

—  r 

97 

«3jnn 

. 

313 

pnn' 

445 

••  - ;  ■ 

mn"'     . 

.  98,203 

Tl 

nmn' 

359 

u'B'ofji.vvifi.aToypatpoj    . 

265 

SxnJ' 

328 

Zt 

D'Siyn' 

236 

nai 

. 

179 

mrj  'K'' 

15R 

INDEX    OF    WORDS    AND 

PHRASES 

ILLUSTRATED. 

K  D 

Page. 

1^1330    . 

119 

xavuv     . 

T  ; 

42 

540 

.    494.  s. 

't  - 

639 
280 

D^nn  Dio 

• 

231 

N*(pD     . 

1 

Nihi)    . 

412 

HNID     . 

307,317 

T'lS 

412 

Dn"(D    . 

505 

2r\2      . 

. 

2 

D"'StyD    . 

452,  478 

np  nSi  a'n3 

127 

nji^D   . 

219 

D^jin^n 

■. 

121 

Sni  ^". 

• 

488 

am 

N  J 

312 

AS 

. 

312 

Ajuitixov 

• 

218 
265 

NJ 

179 

242 

242 

K3J 

W  ■ 

312 
312 

pDp  D'13'7 

. 

143 

N'lIJ     . 

312,317 

niiai!''? 

, 

143 

D^N'33n 

121 

S:jj"". 

,                       ^ 

91 

fji.axxa§aio5 

M  D 

639 
121 

• 

95 
404 

nnn  . 

. 

642 

dSjj     . 

97 

^     •  : 

. 

265 

ny3 

• 

178 

nx^'ipn  ma 

'bnn    . 

265 

129 

/   /  / 

1 

540 

2n3D     . 

2 

•         T 

• 

404 

DnDO     . 

98 

D 

^B'DO     . 

346 

0'T3D   . 

128 

n-lIDD   . 

. 

128 

r\220     . 

. 

412 

INDEX    OF    WOKL»S 


Page. 

y-t/-r. 

358 

n  3 

120 

nsv-ra-rsuj^off 

2Jt;' 

412 

"TTpiVOV 

nna 

5oe 

437 

98 

nna     . 

359 

98 

K^'J33     . 

412 

449 

D\"51D3 

117 

404 

■IDJD3    . 

412 

118 

npD3     . 

128 

114 

T     *      * 

128 

377 

DTIS      . 

488 

118 

ni£'-i3    . 

113 

D'0ni3 

412 

O  ;• 

51 

u^ 

68 

Dans    . 

412 

92 

nn^ns 

118 

97 

250 

P 

97 

rhr\p   . 

.     490.  s. 

95 

nT;p  •      •      • 

372 

354 

pSpj  .      .      . 

367 

354 

Dnn'p  . 

413 

126 

Tr\2  n'?!  np 

127 

330 

:3'n3  np 

127 

92 

2 

207 

<;_aax>j*'  . 

97 

92 

nD'j:^ 

472.  477 

INDEX    OF 

WORDS. 

Page. 

Fan^t. 

V 

r    /J 

J 

-^e5ji/ 

93 

D'NYNV 

346 

Z^ 

.     T  v:  V 

.  onoia' 

202 

nSx     . 

98 

uh-$vi! 

241 

llJf)S      . 

358 

,      T 

^\V3        . 

207 

nay 

91 

nnty    •       .       . 

97 

pnty    . 

458 

p  -1 

D''19K'     . 

117 

Pai(pav,  "Psqsav,  'P£(ji,(pav 

52 

{toB'n    . 

462 

riKT 

307 

T    r  _ 

^yit             . 

92 

D'J15yN*» 

121 

D^tasty  .' 

237 

yi-y^     . 

92 

• 

nn 

437 

0  n 

^so'B'vsurouff     . 

36 

2   K/ 

^nm    . 

346 

min     .        .        .2, 

121,  182 

2a|xapeiTWos  . 

63 

y 

nx^ips's 

117 

DnaiD  i^p^"^ 

126 

117 
117 

nnn     . 

^% 

2u^og     . 

63 

DUin   . 

64' 

tfytvov    , 

506 

INDEX   OF  SUBJECTS. 


Abbreviations,  a  source  of 

alterations  in  the  text, 
Ae0-Said,  his  Arabic  version 

of  the  Pentateuch, 
Abyssinian  dialect, 

or  Ethiopic  version, 

Accent,  how  used  by  Jerome, 
Accents,  in  Hebrew,  age  of, 
musical  notes, 


Page. 

157 

72 
88 
74 

113 
114.  s. 

115 


Accommodation,  the  hypothe- 
sis of,  fa:lse,         .         .         .      36.  s. 

Additions  to  the  Hebrew  text, 
in  manuscripts,    .         .         154,  161 

Ages  of  the  Patriarchs,    .         208,211 

Agur,  author  of  Prov.  xxx.   .         453 

Ahasuerus  of  the  book  of  Es- 
ther is  Xerxes,    .         .         .    284.  s. 

Alcuin's  emendation  of  Je- 
rome's translation,       .         .  78 

Alexandrine  translators  fre- 
quently differ  from  the  He- 
brew text,  .         .         .    125.  s. 

— not 

competent  witnesses  to  the 
usage  of  the  Hebrew  lan- 


version,  authority 

of,  among  Jews  and  Chris- 
tians, 

character 


of, 


of. 


editions  of. 


different  persons 
a  Hebrew  text. 


origin  of, 
history  of, 
recensions 

printed 

made  by 

made  from 

varies    in 


the  different  books, 


54.  s. 

52 

50.  s. 

55 

57.  s. 

58.  s. 
51 
52 
53 


Page. 
Alexandrine  version,  its  use  in 

determining     the    Hebrew 

usage,  ....  102 
,  use  of  in 

the  New  Testament,  .  .  148 
,  concord  an - 

ces  for,  ....  103 
,     lexicons 

for, 103 

of  the  book 

of  Esther,  .  .  .  284.  s. 
,  of  Jere- 
miah, ....  389.  s. 
• of  the  titles 

of  the  Psalms,  .  443,444,448 
,  numbering 

of  the  Psalms  in,  .  .  449.  s. 
of  the  book 

of  Daniel,  .  .  422.  s.  505 
,     Arabic 

version  from,       ...  72 

Alphabetical    poems,   various 

readings  in,         .         .  .  161 

Psalms,       .         .         451 

Alterations  of  the  text  from 

parallel  places,  .  .  .  156.  s. 
Amos,  birth-place,  condition, 

and  character  of,         .         .    322.  s. 

,  age  in  which  he  lived,  323 

,  Book  of,  contents  of,     .    323.  s. 

; 4  style  of,  .         .    325.  s. 

Antiquity  of  the  books  of  the 

Old  Testament,  ...  4 

Antiverp  Polyglot,  .         .         133 

Apocryphal  books,  .         .    42, 49 

AauiLA,  Greek  version  of,     .  60 

Arabic  language,  value  of,  as 

a  cognate  dialect,  .  ,  93.  s. 
•,  its  aflSnity  to 


Hebrew,     . 
,    very    little 

altered  by  lime,  .         .  90,  198 
,  lexicons  of,  94 


orthography   in    He- 
brew manuscripts        .         154, 475 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Arabic  translation  of  the  Bible 
for  the  Propaganda,     . 

versions,  mediate,        . 

,   their   use   in 

determining  the  Hebrew- 
usage,         .... 

version  of  the  Penta- 
teuch from  the  Hebraeo-Sa- 
maritan  text, 

of  the  Penta- 


teuch, by  an  African  Jew,  . 

of  the  Psalms, 

of    Saadias 


Ben  Levi  Askenoth, 
of    Saadias 


Page. 

72.  s, 
72 


102 
72 


Gaon,        .         .        .        .  '1 

Archaisms  in  the  Pentateuch, 

177.  s.  199,  207 

Aristaeas,  .         .         .     50, 51 

Ark  of  the  Covenant,  its  va- 
rious removals,   .         .         .    246.  s. 

Armenian  version,  .         .  74 

Arlachshashta,        ...         273 

,    in     Ezra,    is 

Xerxes,      .         .         .         .274 

ArtOicerxes    of    Nehemiah,   is 

Longimanus,       .         .         .         279 

Asaph,  Psalms  of  .         .         .    445.  s. 

ASHER,  Aaron  Ben,  his  re- 
cension of  the  Hebrew  text,    130.  s. 

Assemblies  of  the  learned,         .    490.  s. 

for  the 

correction  of  MSS.      .         .         124 

AsTRCC,  pointed  out  the  com- 
pilation of  Genesis  from  do- 
cuments,    ....         204 

AuGUSTi's  Einleitung,   .         .  12 

Attgustin,      de      Doctrina 

Christiana,  ...  9 

a  credible  witness 

respecting  the    Punic   lan- 
guage,       .         .         .         .         105 
Author,  history  &c.  of,  useful 
in  determining  the  reading 
of  a  passage,        .         .         .         162 


B. 


Babylon,  its  overthrow  super- 

naturally  predicted,    .         .      32.  s. 

prophecies  of  Isaiah 

against,       ....  355.  ss. 

Bahrbt's  edition  of  the  Hex- 
apla,  ....  63 

Barak's  expedition.  234,  240 


Baruch,  time  in  which  he 
lived,  .... 

,  contents  of  the  book  of, 

,  difficulties  in  it, 

,  language  of, 

,  epistle  in  the  6th  chap. 

— ,  versions  of  the  book  of, 


Fagt 

499 
500 
501 
502 
503 
504 
317.  s. 


BathKol 

Bauer,  a  follower  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  Semler,         .         .  12 
Bel  and  the  Dragon,  History  of,  508.  ss. 
.  diffi- 


culties in, 

Ver- 
sions of,       . 

Bertholdt's  Einleitung,     . 

opinion  respect- 
ing Samuel,Kings,  and  Chro- 
nicles,        .... 

Bildad,  in  the  book  of  Job,  cha- 
racter of,    . 

Bomberg's  editions  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible, 

Books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
number  of,  ... 

Bcxtorf's  edition  of  the  Tar- 
gum  of  Onkelos, 

Ben  Sira,  Proverbs  of, 


Cabul,  the  city, 

Cadmus,  how  many  letters  he 
brought  into  Greece, 

Cajetan,  Cardinal,  his  me 
thod  of  interpreting  Scrip 
lure, 

Caleb,  his  character  and  his 
tory, 

Calmet's  Dissertations, 

Canaanitish  language,    . 

Canon,  derivation  of  the  word, 

of  the  Old  Testament, 

manner 

in  which  it  is  to  be  ascer- 
tained,        .... 

testimo- 


nies to  it. 


computations  of. 


different 


testimo- 


ny of  the  Christian  Church 
to  it,  .... 

that  called  by  the  Ro- 


manists the  First, 


509 

511 
U.S. 


267 

463 

133 

44.  £. 

65 
531 

224 
110 

107 

221 
10 
83 

42 

42 

42.  s. 

43.  ss. 

44.  ss. 

46 

43.  s. 


[NDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Canon,  that  called  by  the  Ro- 
manists the  Second,  (or  (he 
Jipocrypha) 

of    the    Council    of 

Trent,        .... 

Canticles,  Book  of,  contents  of, 

,  a  collec- 
tion of  poems,     . 

,  subject  of, 

,  canonical, 

, author  and 

age  of,         ...         . 

Capel,  his  assertion  of  the  cor- 
ruption of  the  Hebrew  text. 

denies  the  change  of 

the  Hebrew  characters  du- 
ring the  exile,     . 

Captivity  of  the  Israelites,  and 
its  consequences,  supernatu- 
rally  predicted,  . 

Carpzov,  commences  a  new 
epoch  in  the  history  of  In- 
troductions to  the  Scrip- 
tures, .         .         .         , 

Cassiodori  Institutio  divina- 
rum  Scripturarum, 

Chaldeans  prophesied  of  by 
Habakkuk, 

,  their  origin  and  ha- 
bits,   .         .         .     349, 354, 

Chaldee  language,  use  of,  as  a 
cognate  dialect,  . 

Chaldee  Paraphrases,     . 

portion  of  the  Scrip- 
ture,   


,  no  source 

of  corruption  in  the  Hebrew 
text, 

Changes  of  letters  and  words  in 
manuscripts. 

Chapters  in  the  old  Hebrew 
text, 

,  division  of  the  Old 

Testament  into,  . 

•  and  verses,  disadvan- 


tages of  the  division  into. 
Characters    in    Genesis,    not 
overstrained, 

in  Job,  well  drawn, 

Chang,  Rabbi  Judah, 
Cholem,  the  point,  used  in  Je- 
rome's time. 
Chronicles,  Books  of.  Age  of, 

-^,  contents 

of. 


Page. 

46.  s. 

48.  s. 
483.  ss. 

484.  s. 

485.  s. 

487.  s. 

488.  s. 
123 

109 

32 

10 

9 

202 

367,  s. 

94 
68 

83 

132 

155.  ss. 

120 

119.  s. 

121 

216.  s. 
463 
131 

113 
261.  s. 

259.  s?. 


Chronicles,  Books  of,  design  of, 
,  difficul- 
ties of,         ...         . 
,   histori- 


cal credit  of, 

of,       . 

ter  of  the  text  of, 


charac- 


coUec- 


tion  of  with  the  books   of 
Samuel  and  Kings, 
■ ,    discre- 


pancies between   them  and 

the  Books  of  Kings, 
Chronologers,  mistake  of,  re 

spectingthe  Book  of  Judges 
Chronology  of  Genesis,  . 
of  the  reign  of  Je 


Page. 
261 

267.  ss. 

266.  s. 

263.  ss. 

270 

271.  ss. 

269.  s. 


roboam  H. 

Clement  VIIF.  completes  the 
correction  ofthe  Sixfine  edi 
tion  ofthe  Vulgate,     . 

Cola,  and  Commata,  difference 
between,     . 

Compilations,  Historical,  fr 
quent  among  the  Orientals, 

Complutensian  Polyglot., 

Concorlances  for  the  Alexan 
drine  Version, 

Conjectural  emendations, when 
and  how  allowable,     . 

,  doctrinal 

wholly  inadmissible,    . 

Contents  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  . 

,  prove 

that  it  is  not  the  work   of 
impostors,  .... 

agree 

with  the  accounts  of  the  old- 
est profane  writers. 

Context,  use  of,  in  ascertaining 
the  true  reading. 

Conversation  with  God,  reve- 
lation by,    .... 

Copies  of  the  Old  Testament, 
how  multiplied, . 

Coptic-  Psalter, 

version  of  the  Penta- 
teuch,        .... 

Correction  of  manuscripts 
among  the  Orientals,  . 

Corrections  of  the  text  errone- 
ouslv  made. 


235 
211 

325 

81 

117 

187 
133 

103 

164.  s. 

166.  s. 

4.  ss. 

19.  s. 


160.  ?. 

316 

22 
7:5 

73 

124 

1.59 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Correctoria  Bibliorum,  . 

Corruption  of  books,  what  is 
meant  by  it,         .         .         . 

Corruptions,  pretended,  in  the 
Old  Testament,  . 

not    a   source   of 

various  readings, 

Council  of  Trent,  its  Canon  of 
the  Old  Testament,     . 

,  its  decree  re- 
specting; the  interpretation 
of  Scripture, 

-,  its  decree  re- 


specting the   Latia  transla- 
tion o!  Jerome,  . 

orders    the 


Vuljjate     to     be     correctly 
printed,       .... 

Critic,  requisites  for  a,    . 

Critical  conjecture,  limits  of,  . 

knowledge,  necessary 

for   the    proper    use  of  the 
versions,     .... 

evidence,  internal, 

rules.  General,    . 


Criticism  of  the  text, 

,  necessity 

of. 


Higher,  nature  and 
limits  of,     . 
Ctrps,  meaning  of  the  name, 


Page. 

78.  s. 

21 

24.  s. 

159.  s. 

48.  s. 

105 

79.  s. 


81 

163.  s. 

164.  s. 


104 

152 
163.  ss. 
142.  ss. 

142 

167 
350 


D. 

Daniel,  history  of,        .         .         405 

,  Book  of,  contents  of,  406.  ss. 

,  genuineness 

of, 415.  s. 

• ,  origin   and 

condition  of,  .  .  .  422.  ss, 
,  style  of,      .    411.  s. 


,  written  by 

Daniel,       .         ,         •         .  413.  ss, 

,  objections  to 

the  First  Part  of  it,     .         .  417.  ss. 

,  objections  to 

the  Second  Part  of  it,         .  420.  ss. 

,  A  lexandrine 

version  of  it,    .  .         415,  422.  s. 

143 
267 
267 
444 


Dates  of  Manuscripts, 
David,  history  of,  . 

,  promise  made  to  him, 

— ,  Psalms  by, 

,  numbering  of  the  peo- 
ple at  his  command,    . 


268 


Page. 

Debir, 224 

,  conquest  of,           .          .  221 

Decalogue,  existence  of,           .  197.  s. 
Decrees  of  the  kings  of  Persia,  286 
Deity  ,  true  doctrine  concern- 
ing,      213.  s. 

Derivative  meaning  of  words,  9ti 
De  Rossi's  collection  of  vari- 
ous readings,       .         .          .  152 
Deuterocanonical  books, 

42,  46.  ss.  49,  498.  ss. 

Deuteronomy,  author  of,         .  176 

,  contents  of,      .  175 

.  name  of,           .  218 

De  Wette's  Einleitung,  .  12 
,  theory  respect- 
ing the  Pentateuch,  189,  191,197.  s. 
Diacritical  marks  in  Hebrew,  114.  s. 
Dialects,  differences  between,  88.  s. 
-,  use  of,  in  the  study  of 


Hebrew, 

knowledge  of,  neces- 


sary  for  the  prope-  use  of 
the  Versions, 

,    two- 
fold ad  vantage  of, 

,      by 

whom  recommended,  . 

-,  proper  method  of  using 

,  value  o(  particular,    . 

not   changed  in  their 


87,  ss. 


103.  s, 

91 

87 
91.  s. 
93.3. 


general  character,        .  ,  89 

Difficulties    in    the    historical 
books  of  the  Old  Testament 
no  objection  to  their  inspira- 
tion,  ..... 
Dispensations  recorded  in  the 

Old  Testament,  . 
Divination,  different  kinds  of, 
Division  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  . 

of  words,   improper, 

a  source  of  various   read- 
ings,        ,         .         .         158.  s.  490 
Doctrines  of  the   Old  Testa- 


40 

5 
291 


121 


ment,  .         .         .        ~. 

Documents  compiled  in   Ge- 
nesis, .... 

age  of, 

,    histo- 


rical credit  of,     . 

^ ,     how 

digested,     .... 
—    compiled    in    the 


book  of  Joshua, . 


4.  ss. 

204.  ss. 
207 

208.  ss. 

216 

227.  s. 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Page. 

Documents  compiled  in  the 
book  of  Judges,  .         .         .         23o 

used  in  the  books 

of  Samuel,  Kings,  and  Chro- 
nicles,        .         .         ,         .    266.  3. 

Double  sense  of  some  prophe- 
cies, ....      309.  s.  425 

Dragon,  history  of,  5ee  Bel. 

Dreams,  revelation  by,   .         .         317 

Ddpijv,   Prolegomenes  sur  la 

Bible,  ....  10 


E. 


Eastern  and  Western  readings,    129.  s 
Ecclesiastes,  Book  of,  author  of,    495.  s 

.  name  of,     490.  s 

,  contents  of,         492 

,  plan  of,       492.  s 

,  object  of,    493.  s 

,  language 

and  style  of,         .         .         .    494.  s 

,  age  of,    .    496.  s 

Ecclesiasticus,  see  Sirach. 

Editions  of  the  Hebrew  text,     132.  ss. 

— ,  ancient, 

authority  of,        ,         .         .         145 
— — ,  furnish- 
ed with  various  readings,     .   151.  ss. 
Egypt,   prophecies  against  in 

Ezekiel,      ....         399 
Egyptian  versions  of  the  Old 

Testament,  .         •         .73.  s. 
words  in  the  Alexan- 
drine version,     ...  52 
Ehevi  letters,  were  they  for- 
merly vowels .'    .         .         .         112 
Ehud,    ....         234,239 
Eichhorn's  Einleitung,         .  11 
Elam  and  the  Elamites,           ,         349 
Elihu,  in  the  book  of  Job,  cha- 
racter of,     .         .         .         462,463 
-,  does 


not  speak  the  author's  opin- 
ion,   .         .         .         •         • 

__ — ,     his 


469 


speech  written  by  the  author 

of  the  rest  of  the  book,         .         474 

Elijah  and  Elisha,  miracles  of,    269.  s. 

Eliphaz  in  the  book  of  Job, 

character  of,        .         .         .         463 

Elkosh  ....         365 

Epiphanius,  nature  of  his  tes- 
timony respecting   Hebrew 


usage. 


105 


Page. 
Erasmus,   his  note  on   Eph. 

V.  32,  ....  107 
Errors  in  the  text  unavoidable,  123, 132 
in  transcription,  sources 

of;  .  .  ,  .  .  153.  S9. 
Esdras,  first  book  of,  .  .  277 
Esther,  Book  of,  author  of,  289 

,  age  of,  .         289 

,  contents  of,       283.  s. 

,  text  of,         .         290 

.difficulties in,  286.  ss. 

,   omitted     in 


the  canon  of  Melito  of  Sar- 
dis,     .         . 
,  canonical 


tion  to. 


-,  language  of, 
-,  versions  of, 
-,  their  authori- 


44 
290 

-.  .Apocryphal  Book  of,  290, 512.  ss. 

-,  Deuterocanonical  addi- 

512 
513 
514 

514.  s. 

447 
88 

94 

74 

95.  ss. 

99.  s. 

18 

314.  s. 
218 
173 
394 


ty, 

Ethan,  author  of  one  of  the 
Psalms,       .... 

Ethiopic  language, 

,  use  of  as  a 

cognate  dialect. 
Version, 


Etymology,  nature  and  use  of, 

,  limits  of. 

Evidence,    Internal,    negative 
and  positive. 

Evidences  of  the  divine  mis- 
sion of  the  prophets,    . 

Exodus,  Book  of,  name  of, 

,  contents  of, 

Ezekiel,  Age  of, 

,  Book  of,  contents  of,  395.  ss. 

402 
401 

40'2 


,  language  of, 

,  style  of, 

,  order  of  the 

prophecies  in,     . 

— ,  last  9  chap- 


ters of  it  genuine, 

,     prophecies 

against    the    heathens    con- 


402. 


404 


tained  in  it,  genuine, 
Ezra    did  •  not    remodel    the 

Pentateuch,         .         .         .    200.  s. 
not   the   author   of   the 

books  of  Samuel  or  Kings,      258.  s. 
.  author  of  the  book  which 

bears  his  name,  .         .    275.  s. 
as  a  historian,  worthy  of 

credit,         ....  28 


INDEX' OF    SUBJECTS. 


Ezra,  Book  of,  contents  of, 

—. ,  text  of, 

— ,  difficulties  in, 

,  Third  Book  of,      . 


Page. 
273.  s. 
277.  s. 
276.  s. 
277 


Families  of  Manuscripts,       131.  s.  145 


Fas-titig;,  among  the  Orientals, 
Fathers,  their  erroneous  opin- 
ions respecting  the  corrup- 
tions of  the  Hebrew  text  • 
,  their  use  in  the  inter- 
pretation and  criticism  of  the 
Hebrew  text, 

-,  opinions  of,  respecting 


Job, 


-,  quotations  of  the  Old 
Testament  in  their  writings. 
Feminine  terminations  to  mas- 
culine nouns, 
Fifth  Version  of  the  Hexapla, 
Figurative  Syriac  Version, 
First  person  plural,  use  of, 
Foedus,   a    name    applied    to 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, .... 

G. 


288 


24 


105 

466 

151 

490.  s. 
62 
70 

222 


69,72 


Gabriel  Sionita, 
Gallic  words  in  the  Alexan- 
drine Version,  ...  52 
Genealogies,  Eastern,  .  .  251 
Genealogy  in  Ex.  vi.  14—19,  211 

,    in   the   Books   of 

Chronicles,          .         .         .  259.  s. 

Genesis,  Book  of,  name  of,      .  218 

,  contents  of,  172.  s.  210 

,_ ,    written    by 

Moses,        .        .         •         .  189.  s. 
,  of  early  date,  207 .  s . 


,  compiled  from 

ancient  documents,      .         .  203.  ss. 
-,  connexion  of. 


13 


with  the  remainder  of  the 
Pentateuch,         .         .         170,  190 

G  enuineness  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,an  important 
question,     .... 

,  testimo- 
ny attainable  on  the  subject,  14 

testimony  to  be  produced  on 

such  a  question,  .         .  194.  98. 


Genuineness  of  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament,  arguments 
used  to  prove  it, 

— ,  testimo- 
ny of  the  Jewish  Church  in 
favour  of  it, 

-,  internal 


evidence  for  it, 
of  the  Pentateuch, 


Page. 


14 


18 


objections  to  it,    .  .         .  194.  ss. 

Geogony  in  the  book  of  Gene- 
sis,       213.  s. 

German  Hebrew  Manuscripts,         145 

Gesenics  on  the  Samaritan 

Pentateuch,         .         .         .  139.  ss. 

Gideon's  history,    .      234,  239, 240.  s. 

Gourd  of  Jonah,     ...         372 

Grammatical  rules  a  source  of 

various  readings,         .         .         131 

Graves'  Lectures  on  the  Pen- 
tateuch,     .         .         .         181,  193 

Greek  versions  of  the  Old 
Testament,  received  by  the 
Christian  Church,       .         .  25 

,  5th,  6th, 


and  7th 

anonymous,  re- 
mains of  an, 

Gregory  XIV.  corrects  the 
Sixtine  edition  of  the  Vul- 
gate, .         .        .•        . 

H. 

Habaekuk,  Age  of, 

,  Book  of,  contents 

of,      ...         . 

,  style  of, 

Haggai,  Time  of, 

,  Book  of,  contents  of, 

,  style  of, 

Hagiographa, 

Haphtaroth,  divisions  of  the 
Prophets, 

Hardt,  Von  der,  his  hypo- 
thesis respecting  the  book  of 
Jonah,         .... 

Hebrew  Alphabet,  number  of 
its  letters, 

characters,  change  of, 

,  comparison 

of  with  the  Greek,     . 

language, 

-,  changes  of, 


— ,  its  name, 


62 
62.  s. 

81 

367.  s. 

366 

367 
424 
424.  s. 
426 
121 

118.  s. 


373 

109 
108.  s. 

110 

83.  ss. 

196.  s. 

83.  s. 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Page. 
Hebrew  language,  its  history,      84.  s. 


,  its  loss, 

-,  difficulty  of, 
-,   knowledge 


of,  in  Jewish  and  Christian 
schools,  .... 
-,  means  of  ac- 


quiring a  knowledge  of, 
,    differences 


85.  s. 

86 


86.  s. 
87 


between  it  and  the  cognate 
dialects,      .         .         ,         .88.  ss. 

text,  history  of,  .   123.  ss, 

,  editions  ot  .   132.  ss. 

,  integrity  of,  ac- 
knowledged by  the  Chris- 
tian church,        ...  25 

,    versions   of    the 

EookofTobit,    ...         523 

,  vowel  points,  age 

of,       .         ,         .         .         ,  lll.ss. 

Hebron,  conquest  of,       .         .         221 

Heman,  author  of  one  of  the 

Psalms,        ....         447 

Hemistichs,  division  of  the  po- 
etical books  into,  .  .  117 

Hentenius,  his  correction  of 

the  Vulgate,         .         .         .  81 

Hesychius,  his  edition  of  the 

Alexandrine  version,  .         .  57 

Hexapla  of  Origen,         .  .     55.  ss. 

editions  of,      62.  s. 

Hexaplar  versions,  their  use  in 
determining  the  Hebrew 
usage,  .         .  . 

Syriac  version. 


Higher  criticism. 

Historical  books  of  the  Old 
Testament,    inspiration    of, 

translation 

of  in  the  Alexandrine  ver- 
sion, ..... 
credit,    requi- 


sites for. 


102 
70 

167.  s. 

39.  s. 

57 
26 


writers  of  the    Old 


Testament,  worthy  of  credit,      27.  s. 
•  that  they 


were   priests,   a   groundless 
objection,    ....      28.  s. 
History  contained  in  the  Old 

Testament,  .  .         .5 

HoDY  de  textibus  Bibliorum,  10 

HoLDEN  (G.)  on  Proverbs,    .  452.  ss. 
on  Ecclcsiastes,  491.  ss. 


Holmes'  etlition  of  the  Alex- 
andrine version,  . 

Horeb  distinguished  from  Sinai 

HoRNE  (T.  H.),  his  Introduc- 
tion,   ..... 

HoRSi,EY,  his  opinion  on  the 
inspiration  of  the  historical 
books,         .... 

HoSEA,  personal  history  of,     . 

Book  of,  contents  of,    , 

style  of, 

Hottinger's  Thesaurus  Phi- 
lologiCjUS,     .... 

Hoceigant's  critical  edition 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  . 

Huet's  Demonstratio  Evan- 
gelica,         .... 

f. 

Importance  of  the  boi)ks  of  the 

Old  Testament.  . 
Imprecations  in  the  Psalms, 
Inspiration,  definition  of, 

its  limits, 

different  opinion 


(II.)  his  opinion  re- 

?pecting  Inspiration,     .         .    38, 40 


respecting 


use  of, 

how  proved, 

of  the  Old  Testa 


ment,  proofs  of,   . 
Horslev's 


state 


ment  of,      . 

Internal  critical  evidence, 

Interpolations  of  marginal  notes 
into  the  text, 

in    the    Penta 

teuch. 

Interpretation  of  Scripture,  de- 
cree of  the  Cop.ncil  of  Trent 
concerning, 

Interpunction  in  Hebrew, 

Intervals  between  words  in 
Hebrew,     .         .         .         . 

in  Greek  and  Latin 

monuments,  &c. . 

Introduction  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, meaning  of  the  term. 

Introductions  to  the  Old  Tes- 
ment,  literary  history  of, 

Isaiah,  personal  history  of.     . 

Book  of,  contents  of,    . 

language  and 


Pasre. 


58. 


196 


12,  29 


40.  s. 

326.  s. 

327.  s. 
329.  s. 

10 

151 

10 


style  of, 


style  of,    344 


439.  9. 
34 

37.  s. 

39 

41 

34.  s. 

36.  s. 

40.  s. 
152 

157 

191.  s. 

103.  ss. 
115.  ss. 

116.  s. 

116 

9 

9.  ss. 
335.  s. 
338.  ss. 

356 

.  s.,  346 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Isaiah,  Book  of,  publication 
of,       .         .         .         . 

passages  of, 

copied  into  other  books, 

all  the  pro- 


phecies in  it,  are  written  by 
Isaiah,         .... 
particularity  of  some 


of  his  predictions, 

Israel,  kingdom  of, 

■ not  men- 
tioned in  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles, .... 
or  the  ten  tribes,  return 


of  from  captivity, 

//a/a,  what  meant  by  the, 

,  editions  of,     . 

,  emendation  of,    by   Je- 
rome, .... 

Italian    Hebrew   Manuscripts, 

Jltur  Sopherim, 


Page. 
359 
348 

345.  ss. 

357 
255 

258 

273 

75 
76 

77 

•  145 

126 


Jablonski's  Hebrew  Bible, 
Jacob  Ben  Joseph,  his  Per 

sian  translation,  . 
Jael'smurder  of  Sisera,  . 
Jahn's  Hebrew  Bible,  . 
Jciiher,  Book  of,      . 
Jeuuthun,  Psalms  of,    . 
Jeptha's  vow, 
Jeremiah,    his   history   and 


of. 


-  copies  (i'om  Isaiah 
-,  Book  of,  contents 


134 

73 

240 

134.  s. 

224 

445 

241,  244 

380.  s. 
348 


,  style  of, 

,  Alexan- 
drine version  of, 

-,  prophecies  of,  or- 


381.  ss. 
388 


389.  s. 


der  of,  ...  .  389 
Jericho,  overthrow  of,-  .  .  230 
Jeroboam  II.,  king  of  Israel,  323,  325 
Jerome,  a  witness  of  Hebrew 

usage,  .... 
,his  emendation  of  the 


old  Latin  versions, 

,  his  Latin  translation, 

,  reception 

with  which  it  met, 

'■ ,  history  of, 

Martia- 


105 

77 


78 


78. 


nay's  edition  of, 
Jerusalem, 


.    82 
224, 236 


Jerusalem  Targum  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch,     .... 

Jesuits,  their  three  propositions 
respecting  inspiration, 

Jesus  the  Son  of  Sirach,  the 
time  in  which  he  lived, 

Jewish  knowledge  of  the  He- 
brew language,  . 

nation,  its  testimony  in 

favour  of  the  genuineness  of 
the  books  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, .... 

free 

from  objections,  . 

titles  of  the  five  books 


of  the  Pentateuch, 

tradition  respecting  the 


Page. 
67 
38 

535.  3. 
86 


15.  s. 


218.  s. 


236.  9. 


book  of  Judges, 
Jews,  reasons  for  their  belief 
in  the  inspiration  of  the  Old 
Testament,  .         .         .35.  s. 

Joe,  place  of  residence  of,       .    471.  s. 

time  in  which  he  lived,  .    472.  ?• 

his  i-ank,         ...         473 

sepulchre  of,  .         •         .         466 

Book  of,  contents  of,        .  458.  ss. 

arrangement  of,    461.  ss. 

language  of,        .         477 

style  of,      .  461, 475 


author, 
brew. 


~  the  work  of  one 


473. 


author  of,  a  He- 
does  not   belong 
to  the  age  of  the  captivity,  . 
does  not  belong 


475 


to  the  age  of  Solomon, 

written  prior  to 


476 
477 


478 


thor  of, 


character  of. 


the  Exode, 

Moses  the  author  of,  478.  s. 

Hebrew  text  of, 

not  a  version,      .         .         .         475 

design  of  the  au- 

468.  s. 
463 

464 
464 

465.  s. 

467.  s. 
463.  s; 


opinions  respect- 
its  contents,  . 

not  a  parable,    . 

not  a  true  history, 

founded  on  a  real 


history. 


characters  of  the 
personages  in,      . 
Alexandrine  ver- 


sion of, 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Joel,  the  age  of,    . 

Book  of,  contents  of, 

language   and 

style  of,       . 
John,  in  the  Apocalypse  uses 

figures  of  Ezekiel, 
Jonah,  the  age  of, 

Book  of,  contents  of,    . 

. difficulties  in. 


Page. 

363 

361.  s. 

363 

401 
370 
370 

37).  s. 


—  age  of,  . 

. narrative  of, 

Tsrhether  it  is  a  parable, 
whether 


-removed,  375.  ss. 
377.  5. 

373.  s.. 

374.  ss. 

66.  s. 

67 
229.  s. 


it  is  a  true  history, 
Jonathan  Bkn  Uzziel,  Tar- 
gum  of,       .         t 

I PsEDDo-,  Targum 

of,  on  the  Pentateuch, 
Jordan,  stoppage  of, 
Joseph    the   Blind,  supposed 
author    of    Chaldee    Para- 
phrases,      .... 
Josephtjs  awitness  of  Hebrew 
usage,         .... 
~,  his  Antiquities,  au- 
thority of,  as  a  witness  to  va- 
rious readings,    . 
JoSHPA,   arguments  to  prove 
him  the  author  of  the  book 
called  after  him, 
_             Book  of,  contents  of,  . 

-  division  of,    . 

age  of,  . 

, , more    recent 

than  the  time  of  Joshua, 
text  of, 
-  a  compilation, 
—  formed  from 


68 


105 


147 


222 
220 
221 

224.  ss. 

223.  s. 
231.  s. 
186.  s. 

226.  ss. 


ancient  documents, 
design  of  the 

author,       .         .         .         •         221 

its  credibility,    228.  s. 

.  difficulties  in,  229.  ss. 


Page. 
Judges,  Book  of,  authority  of,  239 

contents  of,  .  233.  ss. 

. design  of,       .         234 

difficulties  in,  240.  ss. 

title  of,  .    ■     237 


. Samaritan  books  of,  .    225.  s. 

Judah,  principality  of  the  tribe 

of,  supernaturally  predicted,  32 

kingdom  of,         •         •         255 

—  set  in  opposition  to  Is- 

rael,   .         •         •         •      .  225,446. 

Judges,  were  under  divme  in- 
fluence,       •  •  •  •  o^O 

age  of,  not  heroic,        .         -'^■' 

Book  of,  age  of,  .         .         236 


—  not  u  full  his- 


tory. 


23£ 


not    written 


231 


by  the  author  of  the  book  of 
Joshua,        .... 

compiled  from 

ancient  documents,     .         .  237.  ss, 

— —  first  appendix 

to, 245.  ss. 

second  appen- 
dix to 248.  ss. 

Judith,  Book  of,  age  of,  526,528 

contents  of,    .  524.  ss. 

design  of, 

— '. difficulties  of, 

language  of,  . 

versions  of,    • 

Justin,  value  of  his  testimony 
respecting  Hebrew  usage,  . 


527 

526.  s. 

528 

528.  s. 

105 


K. 


Karkuphensian  Syriac  version,  7  1 
Kennicott's  collection  of  va- 
rious readings,     .          .         •  151.  s. 
Keri  and  Ketib        .         .         .  149 
Kings,  annals  of,     .         .           263,  265 

of  Israel   and    Judah, 

their  relation  to  Jehovah  as 
the  supreme  king  of  the  na- 
tion,     257 

Books  of,  age  of,          .  258 

contents  of,    .  253.  s. 

difficulties  in,  267.  ss. 

. sources  of,     .  263.  ss. 

their  histori- 

266.  s. 

257.  s. 

270.  s. 

271.  s. 
103 

447 


cal  credit. 


-written  by  the 

same  author  as  the  books  of 

Samuel,       .... 

character    of 


their  text,  . 


collation  of 
with  the  Books  of  Chroni- 
cles,   .  .         ,         •  • 

Kircher's  Concordance  to 
theLXX 

Korahites,  Psalms  inscribed  to 
the,    .         .  •         • 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 

Pase 


L. 


Lamentations,  Book  of,  author 

of,       .         .  .         .  . 

. ■ ,  division 


393 


of, 


-,  style  of, 
-,   subject 


393 

394 

393 

10 

95.  s. 

212.  s. 

261.  s. 
276 
Latin  Version  of  the  book  of 

Tobit 522 

Latin  Versions  antecedent  to 

Jerome,       ....      lo.  s. 

,  more  than  one,      75.  s, 

Latu  of  Jehovah,  a  title  of 

the  Pentateuch, 
Law  of  Moses,  a  title  of  the 

Pentateuch, 
referred   to  in 


of,       .         . 

Lamy's    Apparatus    Biblicus, 

Language,  origin  of, 

,  use  of,  by  our  first 

parents,      .... 

of  the  books  of  Chro- 
nicles,        .... 

of  the  book  of  Ezra, 


185.  s. 

186.  s. 
222.  s. 

197 
201 
453 


Joshua,       .... 

Laws,  breach  of,  no  argument 
against  their  existence 

Le  Clerc's  opinions  respect- 
ing the  Pentateuch. 

Lemuel,  mentioned  in  Prov. 
xxxi.,         .... 

Leprosy,  the  disease  of  Job, 

458,  462,  473 

Letters,  changes  of  in  manu- 
scripts        .         .         .         .         155 

,  interchanges  of  in  the 

different  dialects,         .     88.  s.  91.  s. 

,  Hebrew,  .         .  108.  ss. 

Leviticus,  name  of,  .         .218.  s. 

Ledsden's  Philologus  He- 
brajus,  and  Hebrseo.  Mix- 
tus, 

Lexicons,  use  of,     , 

of  the  Arabic  lan- 


guage. 


guage, 
lects. 


of  the  Syriac  lan- 
of  the  cognate  dia- 
for  the  Alexandrine 


version,       .... 
London  Polyglot, 
— ,  Prolegomena  to. 


10 
93 

94 

94 

93 

103 

134 

10 


Longevity  of  the  patriarchs  not 
incredible, 

Louvain,  Faculty  of,  their  con- 
demnation of  the  Jesuitical 
propositions  respecting  in- 
spiration,    .... 

Lccian's  edition  of  the  Alex- 
andrine Version, 

Luz,       .         .         .         .         • 

M. 


Page, 
211 

38 

57 

224 


Maccabees  predicted  by  Dan- 
iel,      409.  ss. 

Eze- 

kiel,  .         .         .         .         400 

Hosea,        328 

Isaiah, 

342.  s.  344 

Joel,  362 

Micah,    332.  s. 

Jere- 

384,  38' 


miah. 


—  Zecha 


riah. 


logy  of. 


Books  of,  Chrono 


— ,  name  of 


tents  of. 


,  works  on 

— ,  First  book  of,  con 


of, 


guage  of. 


sions  of, 
tents  of, 


Second  Book 


culties  in,   . 


and  age  of. 


sions  of, 
Malachi,  time  of, 
,  Book  of,  conte 


date 
Ian 
Ver 
con 
diffi 
uthor 
Ver 

its  of, 


.  style  of, 

,  Archbishop  of  Ar 

magh, 
Manuscripts,  age  of, 

,  collation  of, 

,  goodness  of, 

,  standard,     . 

— — — ,  transcription  of, 


427.  ss. 

544 

539.  s. 
546 

540.  s. 
54L  s. 

542 
543 

543.  s. 

544.  s. 
545 

545.  9. 
435 

435.  s. 

436.  s. 

305 

143 

151.  s. 

144 

145 

153.  ss. 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS 

Pase.  I 


Marginal  notes  introduced  into 

the  ttxt,     ....         157 

Masora,  nature  and  history  of,    128.  s. 

,  value  of  its  testimony 

to  a  reading,       .         .  132,  149 

Masoretic  divisions  of  various 

readings,     ....         128 

editions  of  the  He- 
brew text,  .         .         .         146 

Matres   Lectionis,    were  they 

formerly  vowels  ?         .         .  112 

IMeir,  Rabbi,  a  critic,    .         .         150 

Melchite  recension  of  the  Alex- 
andrine Version,  .         .  58 

Memphite  and  Sahidic  Ver- 
sions, ....  78 

Messiah,  origin  of,  from  the 
line  of  David  supernaturally 
predicted,  ...  32 

,  Psalms  relating  to,     .  439.  ss. 

,  predicted  by  Isaiah,    .    324.  s. 

Malachi,  |     436 

MiCAH,  age  in  which  he  lived,    330.  s. 

Book  of,  contents  of,    .  331.  ss. 

style  of,  .         .    333.  s. 

publication  of,    334.  s. 

MiCHAELis,  (J.  D.)  his  Ein- 

leitung,       .         .         .         .  11 
introduced  atten- 
tion to  various  readings,      .         123 

points  out  means 

of  acquiring  a  knowledge  of 
Hebrew,     ....  87 

(J.  H.)  his  He- 
brew Bible,         .         .  134,  151 

Miracles    of  the    Old   Testa- 
ment,         .... 
true 


miracles. 


of 


divine  origin. 


ob- 
jects of,  primary  and  secon- 
dary,          .... 

proof 

of  a  divine  revelation, 

: not 

susceptible  of  explanations 
as  mere  natural  phenomena, 
of  Moses,  vindi- 


cated, 


Pentateuch, 


no  objection  to  the 


rejected    by  the 
opponents  of  the  Pentateuch 


4,7 
29.  ss. 
33 

33 
33 

31 
198 
197 
194 


Page, 

Miracles    in    the    history    of 

Gideon,       ....         240 

of  Elijah  and  Eli- 

sha, 269.  s. 

Mission  of  the  Prophets,  .    314.  s. 

Montfaucon's  edition  of  the 

Hexapla,    ....  63 

Morals  of  the  Old  Testament,  4 

Mordecai  not  the  author  of  the 

book  of  Esther,  .         .         .289 

Morin's    (J.)    Exercitationes 

Biblicae,      ....  25 

Diatribe  Elench- 

tica,  &c.      ....  25 

Morus,    quotation    from,    on 

higher  criticism,  .         .    167.  s. 

Moses,  author  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, ....  176.  ss. 

styles  himself  so,  .  181.  ss. 

known  as  such  in  all 

ages,  ....    186.  s. 

manner   in   which  he 

wrote  the  Pentateuch,         .    217.  s. 

kept    records    of  his 

transactions,         .         .         .         217 

worthy  of  credit  as  a 

historian,    ....  27 

author  of  the  book  of 

Job,    ....    478.  ss.  482 

design  of,   in   writing 

Job, 481 

Psalm  by,  .         .         .    462.  s. 

Muis  (S.  de)  Aspertiones  He- 

braicae  veritatis,  .         .  25 

Munster,  the  first  Christian 
collector  of  the  various  read- 
ings of  the  Old  Testament,  151 

Mythi,  ....    194,  208.  ss. 

arguments    to    prove 

their  existence  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch refuted,  .         .         .         212 

N. 

NAHrai,    time    in  which  he 

lived,  ....    365.  s. 

book  of,  contents  of,   363.  s. 

style  of,    .    364.  s. 

Names  of  the  books  of  the  Old 

Testament,  ...  I 

Naphtali,  Jacob  BEy,his  re- 
cension of  the  Hebrew  text,    130.  s. 

Nehemiah  the  author  of  the 

book  ascribed  to  him,  .    281,  s. 

as  a   historian, 

worthy  of  credit.        .         -  28 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Page. 

NsHEMiAH,  year  of  his  se- 
cond visit  to  Jerusalem,       .    279.  s. 

book  of,  contents 

of, 278.  s. 

New  Testament,  necessary  to 
the  interpretation  of  the  pro- 
phecies of  the  Old,     .         .         311 

Nineveh,  destruction  of,  .         364 

No-Amon,     ....    365.  s. 

NoRzi  R.  SoLOMow,  a  critical 

Rabbi 150 

Numbering  of  the  people  by 

David,        ....        268 

Numbers,  ancient  method  of 

denoting,  .         .         .         155 

Book  of,  its  name,  .        218 

O. 
Obadiah,  time  in  which  he 

lived,  .... 

book  of,  contents  of 

style  of,     . 

Objective  sense  of  prophecy. 
Obscurity  of  prophecy,  . 
Old    Testament,    why   so 

called,        .... 
worthy 


of  credit, 

contains 

a  divinely  revealed  religion, 
its  inspi- 


ration believed  by  the  Jews, 
•  its  inspi- 


ration asserted  by  Christ  and 
his  apostles, 

its  inspi- 


ration an  article  of  faith  in 
the  ancient  Christian  church, 
not  the 


production  of  one  or  more 
impostors, 
has  not 


been  corrupted. 


pretend- 
ed instance  of  corruption  is 
examined, 

language 


of. 


—————  Quota- 
tions from  in  the  New  Tea  • 
tament,       .... 
Omissions  in  Manuscripts, 
Onkelos,  Targum  of,    . 
Onomatopoietic  words, 
Oracles,  references  on,    . 


369 
368 
368 
309 
305.  ss. 

1 

26 

33 

35 

36.3. 

37 

19.  ss. 
21.  ss. 

24 

83.  ss. 


148 

153.  s. 

64.  s. 

95 

292 


Oracles,   and   divination,  na- 
ture and  contents  of,   . 

related    merely    to 

proximate  events, 

—   were   mere   conjec- 


tures, 

indefinite, 

had  mere  temporal 


objects, 


faith  in,  a  corruption 
of  that  in  prophecy, 
—^ liable  to  con- 


tinual decrease. 
Oriental  Hebrew  manuscripts, 
Origen,  a  witness  of  Hebrew 

usage,         .... 
his  Hexapla, 


Parallel  places,  a  source  of  al- 
terations of  the  text,  . 

A- use  of  in  deter- 
mining the  reading  of  a  pas- 
sage,          .... 

Parallelism,  Poetic,  use  of  in 
determining  a  reading, 

Parortomasiae  considered  beau- 
ties in  Oriental  style, 

in  Isaiah, 


Page. 

296 

298 

299 
300 

297 

294 

295 
145 

105 

55.  ss. 


156.  s. 

161.  s. 
161 


334 
353 

Paris  Polyglot.        .         .         .         134 
Pentateuch,  arrangement  of,  180 

contents  of,  172.  ss. 

— — — — publicly 

known  in  all  ages,       .         .         185 

division  of,  .         218 

general    division 

.      170.  s.  175 

name  of,  .  .  218 
language  of,  177  ss.  196  s. 
style  of,       .         .    179.  s. 


of. 


hypotheses  respect- 
ing,     201.  9. 

not  written  by  pro- 
phets,        .         .         .         .         202 

Moses  author  of  it,  176.  ss. 

has  not  been  re- 
written,     ....  198.  ss. 

known  as  the  Law 

of  Jehovah,     .         .        .    185.  s. 

as  the  Law 

of  Moses,    ....    186.  s. 

as  the  Book 

of  Moses,    ....        187 


arguments  agamst 
its  genuineness,  .         ."        .  194.  ss. 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Pentateuch,  not  an  epic  poem, 

not  H  compilation, 

interpolations  in, 

publication  of, 

how  read  in  the 


synagogues, 

Alexandrine  Ver- 


sion of,         .  .  . 

Persian  Version  of  the  Old 
Testament, 

Perspective  vision  of  the  pro 
phets, 

Peshito  Syriac  Version, 

Pharashioth,  division  of  the 
Pentateuch  into, 

Philo  the  Jew,  not  the  au- 
thor of  the  Book  of  Wisdom, 

Philoxenian  Syriac  Version, 

Phiska, 

Phoenician,  see  Punic,  . 

Phragma, 

Pius  IV.  commences  a  correc 
tion  of  the  Vulgate,     . 

Pius  V.  continues  it, 

Pius  VI.  pretended  prediction 
concerning, 

Plagues  of  Egypt,  • 

Poetry  chiefly  used  in  prophe 
cies,   .... 

Polyglots,      .         .         . 

Predictions  anciently  distin- 
guished from  conjectures,    . 

Prideaux's  view  of  the  chro- 
nology of  the  book  of  Ezra, 

Primary  signification  of  words. 

Probability,  when  in  favour  of 
conjecture. 

Propagation  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  one  God,  and  of  the 
true  religion, 

Prophecies,  origin  of  faith  in, 

in  the  Old   Testa- 


Page. 

1»9 
192.  3. 

191 

217.  s. 

118 
52,54 

73 

307.  s. 
68.  s. 

118 

536 

70 

128 

128 

81 
81 

302 
173, 176 

318.  s. 
132.  ss. 

292 

275 
95 

165.  s. 


ment,  true  prophecies. 


tents  of. 


jects  of. 


sign  of. 


twofold  description. 


sub- 


de- 


of  a 


of 


proximate  events, 
of  remote  events, 

fulfilment  of, 


31.  s. 
293 

31 

296 

311.  S3. 

297.  3. 

314.  s. 

315 

298.  S3. 

320.  s. 


Prophecies  gradually   accom 
plished, 

not  general,  . 

not  ambiguous, 

—   not  mere    conjee 


tures, 
taneous. 


many,  and  consen 

sufficiently  clear, 

external    circum 

stances  of,  . 

—  are  testimony  re 


specting  the  nature  and  go 
vernment  of  God, 
there  is  no  ground 


Page. 

320 

302.  ss. 

300 


299. 


297 
305 


295.  s. 


298 


to  object  that  they  have  not 
attained  their  end,       .         .         298 

have  a  double  sense,    309.  s. 

of  Ezekiel,  order  of,         402 

of  Isaiah,  particula- 


rity of. 


357 
389 

292.  s. 

306 


•  of  Jeremiah,  order  of 
Prophecy,  references  on, 

necessarily  in  some 

degree  obscure, 

.  Mosaic  laws  respect- 
ing,      313.  s. 

Prophetic  style,      .         .         .    318.  s. 

perspective  vision,  .    307.  s. 

Prophets,  not  mere  wise  men, 

311,314 

not  demagogues,       .    311.  s. 

evidences  of  divine 

mission  of,  ....    314.  s. 

divine  operations  on 

their  minds,         .         .         .    315.?. 

use  of  divine  autho- 
rity by  them,       .         .         .    301.  s. 

wrote  the  histories  of 

the  kings,  .         .         .         263—265 

historians  worthy  of 

credit,         ....  28 

121 

119 

361 


books  of  the,  divided 
intoybrmer  and  latter, 
division 


of  into  Haphtaroth, 


which 
are  of  an  uncertain  age, 
Alexan- 


drine version  of. 
Prose  parts  of  the  prophecies, 
Protocanonical  books,     . 
Proverbs  of  Solomon,  title  of, 
contents 

of, 


54 

318 

42 

452 


/IS?. 


INDEX     OF    SUBJECTS. 


Proverbs  of  Solomon,  written 
by  Solomon, 

style  of, 

use  of, 

compila 


tion  of, 


—  Alexan 


drine  version  of, 
Provincialisms, 
Psalm  of  Moses, 
Psalms,  alphabetical, 

anonymous, 

ascribed  to  Solomon, 

. choral 

of  Asaph,    . 

of  David,   . 

of  Heman  and  Ethan, 

of  Jeduthun, 

of  degrees, 

historical,   . 

inscribed  to  the  Kora 


hites. 


penitential, 
relating  to  the  Messiah 
•  titles  of, 

■  age  of, 

■  Book  of,  contents  of, 
^  collection  and 


division  of. 


in  the, 


version  of, 


date  of, 
imprecations 

Alexandrine 


Page. 

454 

455.  s. 

456.  s. 

454.  s. 

54 

89 

443.  s. 

109,451 

44!i 

447 

451 

445.  s. 

444 

447 

445 

450.  s. 

439 

447 
451 

439.  ss. 
441.  ss. 
442.  s. 

438.  ss. 

448.  ss. 
438 

439.  ss. 
54 


Punic  language,  remains  of,   83,  90,  95 

Q. 

Quotation,  mode  of  among  the 

Jews,  ....         120 

Quotations  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  the  Fathers     .         .         151 

Old  Testa- 
ment in  the  New  Testament,         148 
■  Old  Testa- 


ment in  the  Rabbinical  wri- 
ters,   .         .         .         .         .    149.  s. 
■  Old  Testa- 


ment in  the  Talmud,  .         .    148.  s. 

R. 

Rabbinic  dialect,    ...  85 

Rabbinical    writers,    as    wit- 
nesses to  various  readings,   .    149.  s. 


Rabbinical  writers  notice  va- 
rious readings, 

not  com- 
petent witnesses  to  Hebrew 
usage,          .         .         .         , 

Rages  in  Media, 

Readings,  see  Various  Read- 
ings. 

Recensions  of  Manuscripts, 

Resurrection,  mentioned  in  the 
book  of  Job, 

Revelation  in  the  Old  Testa 
ment, 

to  the    prophets 

character  of, 

dif. 

ferent  kinds  of,    . 

Rhyme,  in  the  book  of  Pro 
verbs, 

Rossi,  De,  his  collection  of 
various  readings, 

Ruth,  Book  of,  age  of,    . 

contents  of, 

-  worthy  of  ere 


dence, 


one  book  with 


that  of  Judges, 


Page. 
131.?. 


86 
516 


131.  s. 

469.  ». 

33 

315.  ss. 

316.  s. 

456 

152 
250 

249.  s. 

251 

233 


Saadias  Ben  Levi  Aske- 
NOTH,  his  Arabic  Version,  . 

Saadias  Gaon, 

his     Arabic 

version,       .... 

his   Hebrew 


71.  c. 

64 

71,  130 

grammar,    ....         131 
Sabatier,  in  error  respecting 
the  number  of  Latin  ver- 
sions before  Jerome,    .         .      75.  s. 
Sabbath,  observance  of,    198,  214,  215 
Sahidic  translation  of  Dan.  ix.  73 

Samaritan  Book  of  Joshua,         225.  s. 

dialect, .         .         .88,  94 

people,  account  of,    137.  ss. 

Pentateuch,   disco- 
very of,       ....         138 
its  ori- 
gin and  history,  .  .         .  138.  ss. 
priest  did  not  remo- 
del the  Pentateuch,     .         .         200 

Text,     .         .         .  135.  ss. 

Version,  .         .  64 


Samson's    actions    not   incre- 
dible, .         .         .        .241.  ss. 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECT: 


credit  of, 


Page. 
Samson's  historv  in  the  book 

of  Judges,  ....    238.  s. 

not  complete,         243 

strength,  connexion 

of  with  his  hair,  .  .         243,245 

Samuel,  perhaps  author  of  the 

book  of  Judges,  .  .         .         236 

Books  of,  age  of,         .         258 

contents  of,    253.  s. 

difficulties 

in 207.  ss. 

266.  s. 
263.  ss. 

270 

270.  s. 

271.  s. 
256 

255.  ss. 
254 


historical 


sources  of,  . 
•     interpola- 


tions in, 


the  text  of, 


character  of 


—  collation   of 
with  the  Books  of  Chroni- 
cles,  ..... 
and  those  of 


Kings,  written  by  the  same 
author,  .... 
—  and  those  of 


Kings,  not  coeval  with  the 
transactions  which  they  re- 
cord, ..... 
Second  Book  of.  Ap- 


pendix to, 

Sanchoniathon,  foreign  evi- 
dence to  the  genuineness  of 
the  Old  Testament,     .         .       17.  s. 

Satan  in  the  Book  of  Job,        462,  476 

Saul's  family,  slaughter  of,      .  267.  ss. 

Scholastic  Divines,  their  error 
respecting  the  corruption  of 
the  Hebrew  text,         .         .      24.  s. 

— their  opin- 
ions respecting  inspiration',  . 

ScHnLTENS  defends  the  use 
of  the  dialects,     . 

Sebirim,         .         .         •         • 

Semler,  instrumental  in  cor- 
rupting biblical  criticism,    . 

.  introduces  loose  no- 
tions of  inspiration  among 
the  Protestants,  . 

his  opinion  respect- 


ing  the   credibility    of    the 
Pentateuch, 
Sennacherib,  prophecies  of  Isa- 
iah concernin":,   . 


38 

f!7 
128 

12 

38 

211.  s. 
353 


Septuagint,  see  Alexandrine 
f^ersion,      .... 

Series  of  discourse,  use  of  in 
aseertaining  the  true  reading 

Seventh  Version,  of  the  Hexa- 
pla,     ..... 

Shamgar's  slaughter  of  the 
Philistines, 

Shemitish  language, 

etymology 

of,  necessary  to  understand 
the  New  Testament, 

Shiloh,  time  of  the  Taberna- 
cle's being  there, 

Skurek,  the  vowel  point  used 
in  Jerome's  lime, 

Siderim  of  Jacob  beu  Chajim, 

Simon,  (R.)  Histoire  Critique 
du  Vieux  Testament, 

opponents  of, 

his  hypothesis  re- 
specting the  Pentateuch, 

SiRACH,  THE  Son  of,  . 


rage. 

JGU 

62 

240 

99 

246.  s. 

113 
120 

10.  s. 
11 

202 
530.  s. 


dom  of,  contents  of,     . 

531.  s. 

-  me- 

thod of,       . 

532 

sions  of,       . 

533 

Sisera's  slaughter  by  Jael, 

240 

Sixth  Version,  of  the  Hexapla, 

62 

SixTus  V.  completes  the  cor- 

rection of  the  Vulgate, 

81 

SixTus  Senensis,  his  Bibli- 

otheca  Sacra, 

10.  s. 

,i._ 

dication  of,  to  Benedict  XIV'.         107 
Slavonic  Version,    .         .         .  !■'> 

Solomon  author  of  the  book 

of  Proverbs, 

Psalms  ascribed  to, 

not   the    author   of 

Canticles,    .         .         .         • 
did    he    write    the 

book  of  Ecclesiastes .'  . 
Soncini  Hebrew  Bible,  . 
Song  of  Songs,  See   Canticles, 

of  the 'I'hree  Children,  .    505.  s 

Sons  of  Cod,  in  the  book  of 

Job,  and  elsewhere,     . 
Spanish  Hebrew  Manuscripts, 
Spuriousness  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, manner  of  procedure 

necessary  to  prove  it, 


454.  s. 

447 


488 


495.  s. 
133 


476 
i45 


20.  s. 


72 


INDEX    OF    SUBJECTS. 


Page 
Staadard  Manuscript?,  .  .  T<51.  s 
STEPHEJfS'  (R.)  correction  of 

the  Vulgate 
Stuart's  (M.)  edition  of  the 
Citations  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  the  New,    . 
Subscriptions  to  Manuscripts, 
Subjective  sense  of  prophecy, 
Susannah,  History  of,     . 
difficul- 


ties in. 


of, 

Symbolical  representations  of 
the  prophets  not  merely  pa- 
rabolic,       .... 

SvMMAcnus,  Version  of, 

Synagogue,  the  great,     . 

Syntax,  illustrated  by  etymo- 
logy, .... 

Syriac  language,  use  of,  as  a 
cognate  dialect,  . 

"^ not    much 


changed. 


vowel  points 


Version,  Figurative,    . 

Hexaplar,     . 

Karkuphen- 


sian, 


Peshito,    its 

date,  .         .         . 

de- 
rived injmediately  from  the 
Hebrew,     .... 

made 


by  different  persons. 


edi- 


tions of. 


version  from, 
Heraclea,    . 
by  Simeon, 


81 


148 
143 
309 
506 


Page, 
Syriac  Version,    of   the    First 

Book  of  Maccabees,    .  .         543 

• Versions,  Mediate,       .      69.  s. 

T. 


Tabernacle,  not  stationary  at 

Shiloh,        .... 

Talmud,  quotations  from  the 


241' 


.    Its 

use  in  determining  the  He- 
brew usage, 

Arabic 


•  of  Thomas  of 
■of  the  Psalms, 
■  of  Ecclesias- 


ticus, 


of  Tobit, 


of  Judith,      . 
•  oi  the  book 


507 
508 

319 
60 

45.  s. 

97 

94 

90 

112.  s. 

70.  s. 

70 

71 

68.  s. 

69 
69 

69  ] 

102 

72 
71 
71 

533 

529 


Old  Testament  in, 
Talmudic  dialect,  . 
Targums, 
altered  to 


.    148.  s. 
85,  88,  94 
.     64.  ss. 
uit  the 

132,  147 


Hebrew  text, 
their  use  in  deter- 
mining the  Hebrew  usage, 
Teslamentum,  use  of  the  word, 

in  the  Latin  translation. 
Testimony  to  the  genuineness 

of  books,     .... 
Text  of  the   Old  Testament, 

history  of,  . 
Hebrew,  before  the  time 

oftheLXX.,       . 
from  the  age  of 

the  LXX.  to  A.D.  200, 

from  A.D.  200, 


102 


to  A.D.  500, 


123.  ss. 

124.  s. 

125.  .=  . 

126.  ss. 

131.  ss. 
486 


from  A.D.  1040 
to  A.D.  1477,      . 
Theodore  of  Mopsuestia, 
Theodoret,  value  of  his  tes- 
timony respecting   Hebrew 

usage,         ....  105 

THEODOTiojy,  Version  of        .  60.  s. 

Thikkun  Sopherim,         .         ,  126 

Three  Children,  Song  of        .  505.  ss. 

Titles  of  the  Psalms,       ,         .  441.  ss. 

age  of    .  442.  s. 

Tobit,  book  of,  age  of,    .         .  520 

author  of,         .  521 

contents  of,       .  516.  ss. 

difficulties  in,   .  518.  s. 

language  of,      .  520 

versions  of,        .  522.  s. 

ToELLNER  on  inspiration,     .  38 
Tradition  in  the   Patriarchal 

age, 208.  s. 

Trance,  a  mode  of  revelation,  316 
Transcription,  careful  method 

of,  used  in  the  East,    .         .  124 

of  manuscripts, 

sources  of  errors  in,    .         .  153.  ss. 


LNDEX    OF    SLB.n:(  T.S, 


Translations,  see  Versions  ; 
Alexandrine  ;  Armenian  ; 
kc 

Translators,  ancient,  witnesses 
of  the  usage  of  language,    . 

Transpositions  in  manuscripts, 

Trent,  Council  of.  see  Council, 

Tribes,  the  ten,  gradually  re- 
turned to  Judea, 

Trommii  Concordantise  LXX 
Interpretum, 

TxcHSENi  Tentamen,  &c.     . 

Tyre,  prophecy  of  Isaiah 
against,       .... 

V.  . 


Pa  ire. 


100 
155 


273 

103 
145 

354 


Van  Der  Hooght's  Hebrew- 
Bible,         ,         .         .         .         134 

Various    readings,    collections 

of, 151.  ss. 

.  nature  and 

origin  of,    .         .         .  123,153 

noticed  by 

Jewish  writers,  .         .         .  131.  ss. 

, not  the  re- 
sult of  corruption,       .         .         159- 

of  Ben  Asher 

and  Ben  Naphtali,       .         .         130 

— —  Eastern  and 

Western,  .         .         •    129.  s. 

, in  the  Tal- 
mud and  Masora,         .         .  126.SS. 

preceding 

the  Alexandrine  Version,     .         1 25 

VATER,his  hypothesis  respect- 
ing the  Pentateuch,  189,  197.  s.  202 

Verses,  division    of   the   Old 

Testament  into,  .     117,  119.  s. 

Versions,  see  Alexandrine,  Sec. 

ancient,  authority  of, 


as  witnesses  respectmg  vari- 
ous readings, 
their  autho- 


rity unequal. 


—   which   are 
useful    in  determining  the 
Hebrew  usage,  . 
method   of 


using  them  for  determining 
the  Hebrew  usage,      . 

requisites  for 


a  proper  use  of  them, 


146 

49 

101.  s. 

103 
103.  s. 


Versions,  ancient,  need  the  aid 

of  etymology,     ...  09 

twofold  ad- 
vantage of,  .         .         .    100.  ?. 

Visions,  revelations  by,  .    316.  s. 

of  the  prophets,  .         404 

really 

took  place,  .         .         .    319.  s. 

Voice  from  heaven,  revelation 

by, 317 

Vossins  (G.)  his  opinions  re- 
specting the  Hebrew  text,  26 

Vowel  points  in  the  Hebrew, 

age  of,        .         ...  111.  ss. 

Vowel  signs  among  the  ancient 

Hebrews,    ....  112.  ss. 

the  present,  not  to 

be  rejected  for  slight  reasons,         114 

Vulgate  Version,  origin  of  its 

name,         .         .         •         .  75 

is  really  Je- 
rome's translation,  parts  ex- 
cepted,       ....  82 

different  cor- 
rections of  its  text,     .         .  ol 

early  editions 

of,      .         .         .         .         .  82 

its   value  in 


determining  Hebrew  usage,  1("2 
its  language 

often  misunderstood,  .  104 
in  what  sense 


it  is  recognised  as  authenlic 

by  the  Council  of  Trent,     .  80 

Uz,  land  of,    .         .         .         .  47 1 

W. 

Wisdom,  Book  of,  author  and 

age  of,        .         :         .         .  536 

—  contents  of,  535 

language  of,  536 

—  but  one  work,  537 

versions  of,  538 


Z. 

Zechariah,  time   in  which 

he  lived,     .         .         •         •         426 

_— acquainted  with 

the  writings  of  the  older 
prophets,    ,         .         .         •         434 


INDEX    OF  SUBJECTS. 

Page.  Page. 

Zechariah,  book  of,  contents  Zechariah,  book  of,  both  parts 

of, 426.  ss.  of,  attributed  to  Zechariah,  431.  ss. 

'"style  of,    430.  s,  Zephaniah,  the  age  of,         .         379 

differences  book  of,  contents 

of  style  in  it,      .         .         .    433.  s.  ■        of. 380 

publica-  style  of,      .         .         380 


tion  of,        ...         .    434.  s.      Zophar,  in  the  book  of  Job, 

character  of,        .         .         .         463 


ERRATA. 


jSotwithsianding  the  great  care  which  has  been  taken  in  the  correction 
of  the  press,  the  following  errata  have  been  discovered. 

Page  2,  line    6  from  the  bottom,  for  Velthpesen  read  Velthusejv. 

55  4,    „      5  „  „       after  '•  nations,"  insert  the  reference  [b], 

„  8,    „    15  for  »  abrisz"  read  «  Abriss." 

„  10,    „      2  for  "  Apparata"  read  "  Apparatus." 

„  56,  first  column,  for  nTT'  read  ^"'n^ 

„  57,  line  13,  for  "  hyperlemnisks"  read  "  hypolemnisks." 

„  64,     „    13  from  the  bottom,  for  "jlKiin  read  jix-Jin. 

•r     —  T     — 

„      73,     „      5  from  the  bottom,  for  "  Mvinster,"  read  "  Muenter." 
„      75,    „    13  from  the  bottom,  for  Vulgatam  read  Vulgata. 
„      76,    „      2  from  bottom,  for  "  est"  read  "  esse." 

„     128,     „    10,  for  "  the  publication"  read  "  the  time  of  the  publication  of 
the  Masora." 

,,     131,     „      7  from  the  bottom,  for  "  than  single"  read  » than  a  single." 
„     165,     „      8,  for  "  restore"  read  "  correct." 

„     191,  bottom,  for  "I3j;  read  i:jr. 

„     205,  line    2  from  the  bottom,  for  "  on  Le  Cene"  read  "  on  the  theories  of 

Le  Cene." 
„    238,     „    17  for  "  transactions  at"  read  "  transactions  of." 
"     254,     „      1,  after  "his  intention"  add  "  of  building  a  temple." 
„     258,     „    19,  for  "  assertion"  read  "  assertions." 
,,    264,     „    19,  for  "  book  of  Samuel"  read  "  books  of  Samuel." 
312,     „    10  from  the  bottom,  for  Nin  read  Nin. 

„    313,  at  the  end  of  notes  [a]  and  [b]  add  Tr. 

„    314,  line     8  from  tlie  bottom,  after  "  by  his  style"  dele  ''  alone." 

„    330,     „      3  from  the  bottom,  for  ■'nB'Hysn  read  "'nt:'lsn. 

„    345,     „      7  from  the  bottom,  for  IDr  read  noj<\ 

„    374,     „    17,  for  "  parobolic"  read  "  parabolic." 

„    396,     „    20,  for  "  although  he  had"  read  "  although  God  had." 

..    410,     „    10,  for  "  thy  people"  read  "  the  people." 


ERRATA. 

Page  420,  line  10  from  the  bottom,  for  "  than  of  certain"  read  "  than  that  of 
certain." 
„    425,    „      7  from  the  bottom,  for  J.  H.  Michaelis  read  J.  D.  Michaelis. 
„     429,     „      8  from  the  bottom,  for  "  intoxication  like"  read  "  intoxication  ; 

—like," 
„    431,     „    14,  for  "  viii.  2,  3."  read  vii.  2,  3." 

„     442,     „      3,  after  "  the  music"  add  "  and  the  musical  performers." 
„    450,     „      5  from  the  bottom,  for  ""itt*  read  Tiy. 

»-  ^  /    / 

insert  a  comma. 


„     465,     „     13,  between  ^  ^^^i  f    and   ^     ->1  a  1 

,,      „        „    21,  for  "mendio"  read  "  medio." 


